COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 2022 Rule of Law Report Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in France Accompanying the document Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions 2022 Rule of Law Report The rule of law situation in the European Union
Date: 2022-07-13
Institutions: European Commission, Secretariat-General
Subjects: France, coronavirus disease, corruption, democracy, epidemic, independence of the judiciary, infringement of EU law, pluralism in the media, political rights, rule of law

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Luxembourg, 13.7.2022  SWD(2022) 510 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 2022 Rule of Law Report        Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in France Accompanying the document Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions 2022 Rule of Law Report          The rule of law situation in the European Union {COM(2022) 500 final} - {SWD(2022) 501 final} - {SWD(2022) 502 final} - {SWD(2022) 503 final} - {SWD(2022) 504 final} - {SWD(2022) 505 final} - {SWD(2022) 506 final} - {SWD(2022) 507 final} - {SWD(2022) 508 final} - {SWD(2022) 509 final} - {SWD(2022) 511 final} - {SWD(2022) 512 final} - {SWD(2022) 513 final} - {SWD(2022) 514 final} - {SWD(2022) 515 final} - {SWD(2022) 516 final} - {SWD(2022) 517 final} - {SWD(2022) 518 final} - {SWD(2022) 519 final} - {SWD(2022) 520 final} - {SWD(2022) 521 final} - {SWD(2022) 522 final} - {SWD(2022) 523 final} - {SWD(2022) 524 final} - {SWD(2022) 525 final} - {SWD(2022) 526 final} - {SWD(2022) 527 final}  
 
 
ABSTRACT 

A  comprehensive  consultation  process  took  place  to  identify  further  reforms  needed  to 
address potential issues affecting the French justice system. In this context, the judiciary, in 
particular the High Council for the Judiciary, made several calls for reforms, including on the 
accountability and protection of magistrates, and for an increase in human resources beyond 
the  additional  resources  already  allocated.  The  length  of  proceedings  in  the  justice  system 
increased, and the Ministry of Justice is evaluating further needs. The decision of the Minister 
of  Justice  to  open  administrative  investigations  against  several  magistrates  for  alleged 
violations of ethical obligations is being examined in Court. While some digital tools at the 
disposal  of litigants  and justice professionals  continue being deployed successfully,  the key 
ongoing projects to increase the digitalisation of civil and criminal justice have encountered 
difficulties  in  their  implementation.  As  regards  lawyers,  the  Law  for  trust  in  the  justice 
system created new safeguards for professional secrecy, ethics and disciplinary procedures. 

The  conviction  of  high-level  corruption  cases  continues  to  bring  tangible  results  despite 
challenges  linked  to  the  limited  resources  as  well  as  structural  weaknesses.  The  national 
anticorruption plan for 2020-2022 continues to be implemented. Rules on conflict of interest 
are in place and a new law was adopted for the protection of whistleblowers. A regulation of 
lobbying  is  in  place,  but  significant  concerns  remain  in  relation  to  the  application  of  these 
rules to all types of lobbying actors. Asset declarations are disclosed and regularly verified. 
The  human  resources  of  the  National  Commission  on  Campaign  Accounts  and  Political 
Financing continues to be insufficient compared to its workload. The measures introduced in 
public procurement during the COVID-19 pandemic remain in place. 

France has a strong legal framework guaranteeing media freedom and pluralism, mainly due 
to safeguards stemming both from the Constitution and from legislation. A new independent 
authority  -  Autorité  de  régulation  de  la  communication  audiovisuelle  et  numérique 
(ARCOM) has been created from the merger of the Conseil supérieur de l’audiovisuel (CSA) 
and  the  online  copyright  authority,  the  Haute  autorité  pour  la  diffusion  des  oeuvres  et  la 
protection des droits sur internet (HADOPI), with increased powers over the entire field of 
audiovisual  and digital  content.  Legal  and structural  safeguards  ensure the independence of 
the  French  public  service  media.  The  Government  has  taken  measures  to  address  the 
increasing  attacks  and  threats  against  journalists  during  protests  or  demonstrations.  The 
persisting issue of horizontal and cross-media concentration has been examined by a Senate 
Commission of enquiry, which suggested a substantive revision of the existing legislation to 
preserve  freedom  of  information.  Challenges  persist  regarding  the  transparency  of  complex 
media ownership structures. 

The practice of nationwide public consultations was further reinforced and extended to other 
fields,  including  the  justice  system.  Accelerated  procedures  for  the  adoption  of  laws 
continued  to  be  used  regularly,  including  for  laws  with  a  significant  impact  on  individual 
freedoms.  The  COVID-19  pandemic  emergency  regime  has  been  extended  until  July  2022, 
while the Constitutional Council defined the limits of the executive and legislative powers in 
this context. Independent authorities issued opinions regarding the impact of laws adopted to 
manage crisis situations on individual freedoms. New laws have been adopted to improve the 
financial  environment  for  civil  society  organisations.  The  Law  on  republican  principles 
entered  into  force  and  a  number  of  stakeholders  raised  concerns  as  regards  its  potential 
impact on the civic space.  

1 

 
RECOMMENDATIONS 

It is recommended to France to: 

  Continue  efforts  to  complete  ongoing  projects  aimed  at  full  digitalisation  of  civil  and 

criminal court proceedings. 

  Continue efforts to ensure adequate human resources for the justice system, including to 
improve its efficiency, taking into account European standards on resources for the justice 
system.   

  Continue the effective investigation, prosecution and sanctioning of high-level corruption 

offences.   

  Ensure  that  rules  on  lobbying  activities  are  consistently  applied  to  all  relevant  actors, 

including at top executive level. 

  Enhance  the  transparency  of  media  ownership,  in  particular  regarding  complex 

shareholding structures, building on the existing legal safeguards. 

2 

 
I. 

JUSTICE SYSTEM  

The justice system is composed of two autonomous branches of courts: ordinary courts with 
jurisdiction in civil and criminal cases on the one hand, and administrative courts on the other 
hand.  Both  branches  consist  of  three  levels  of  courts,  with  first  instance  courts,  courts  of 
appeal and an upper court (the Court of Cassation and the Council of State, respectively). The 
Council of State also has an advisory branch that provides opinions on draft legislation, and is 
tasked with  the management of the administrative tribunals  and courts of appeal.  The High 
Council  for  the  Judiciary,  half  of  whose  members  are  magistrates  elected  by  their  peers1, 
plays an important role in safeguarding judicial independence. It nominates candidates for top 
judicial functions and, as regards the appointment of judges by the Minister of Justice, issues 
binding  opinions2.  The  prosecution  service  is  part  of  the  judiciary,  and  falls  under  the 
authority of the Minister of Justice3. The latter can give general instructions on prosecution 
policy  but  is  barred  from  giving  instructions  in  individual  cases4.  In  addition,  the 
Constitutional Council is competent to verify the constitutionality of laws. France participates 
in the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO). Lawyers are represented by various bar 
associations throughout France. 

Independence  

The level of perceived  judicial independence in France continues to be average among 
the  general  public  and  is  now  high  among  companies.  Overall,  56%  of  the  general 
population and 61% of companies perceive the level of independence of courts and judges to 
be ‘fairly or very good’ in 20225. According to data in the 2022 EU Justice Scoreboard, no 
clear  trend  can  be  identified  in  the  evolution  of  the  perceived  level  of  independence  since 
2016. The perceived judicial independence among the general public has slightly decreased 
in comparison with 2021 (57%), but it is higher than in 2016 (54%). The perceived judicial 
independence  among  companies  has  increased  in  comparison  with  2021  (58%),  as  well  as 
with 2016 (59%). 

The High Council for the Judiciary called for reforms to increase the accountability and 
protection  of  magistrates.  On  24  September  2021,  the  plenary  of  the  High  Council 

1   The  High  Council  for  the  Judiciary  has  two  distinct  formations.  For  the  formation  relating  to  judges,  the 
High  Council  for  the  Judiciary  is  comprised  of  the  President  of  the  Court  of  Cassation,  five  judges,  one 
public prosecutor, one member of  the Council of State, one lawyer, and six other qualified members,  who 
are  not  affiliated  with  the  Parliament,  the  judiciary  or  the  administrative  order.  An  additional  judge 
completes this formation when acting as a disciplinary council. For the formation relating to prosecutors, the 
High Council of the Judiciary is comprised of the General Prosecutor of the Court of Cassation, five public 
prosecutors, one judge, the same  member of the Council of State as mentioned above, the same lawyer as 
mentioned above  and the same six other qualified  members as mentioned above. An additional prosecutor 
completes  this  formation  when  acting  as  a  disciplinary  council.  See  also  in  that  regard  Recommendation 
CM/Rec(2010)12 of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, para. 27 which states that ‘Not 
less than half the members of such councils [for the judiciary] should be judges chosen by their peers from 
all levels of the judiciary and with respect for pluralism inside the judiciary’.  

2   Prosecutors are currently nominated by the Minister of Justice, following an advisory opinion of the Council.  
3   Art. 5 of Ordinance 58-1270 of 22 December 1958.  
4   Art. 1of Law 2013-669 of 25 July 2013 and Art. 30 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.  
5   Figures 50 and 52, 2022 EU Justice Scoreboard. The level of perceived judicial independence is categorised 
as  follows:  very  low  (below  30%  of  respondents  perceive  judicial  independence  as  fairly  good  and  very 
good); low (between 30-39%), average (between 40-59%), high (between 60-75%), very high (above 75%). 

3 

 
                                                 
submitted  the  opinion  requested  by  the  President  of  the  Republic6  on  the  liability  and 
protection of magistrates. It made 30 proposals7 around four objectives: putting ethics at the 
heart  of  the  judicial  function8,  promoting  the  detection  of  disciplinary  misconduct9, 
improving  the  conduct  of  disciplinary  proceedings  and  the  scale  of  sanctions10,  and 
strengthening  the  personal  and  functional  protection  of  magistrates11.  Some  proposals 
reiterate  the  need  to  adopt  constitutional  reforms  initiated  several  times  in  the  past  but 
without success12. The proposed constitutional amendments would notably transfer the power 
to  decide  on  disciplinary  matters  regarding  prosecutors  from  the  Minister  of  Justice  to  the 
High  Council  and  align  the  conditions  for  the  appointment  of  prosecutors  with  those 
applicable to judges, thus making the opinion of the High Council binding on the Minister of 
Justice13.  On  this  aspect,  the  opinion  of  the  High  Council  for  the  Judiciary  converges  with 

6   The President of the Republic had requested the opinion on 17 February 2021 in his role as guarantor of the 
independence  of  the  judiciary  under  Art.  65  of  the  Constitution.  See  2021  Rule  of  Law  Report,  Country 
Chapter on the rule of law situation in France, pp. 3-4. 

7   High  Council  for  the  Judiciary,  Opinion  of  24  September  2021  on  the  accountability  and  protection  of 

magistrates. See Annex I. 

8   To  increase  accountability,  the  opinion  of  the  High  Council  proposes  to  remedy  the  lack  of  evaluation  of 
senior magistrates, to create a regime preventing risks of conflicts of interest, and to grant the committee of 
admission of individual disciplinary applications the power to recall magistrates to their ethical obligations 
in  case  of  objectionable  conducts  that  do  not  qualify  as  disciplinary  offences.  The  High  Council  also 
recommends the inclusion of a specific section on ethics in the evaluation grid of magistrates, which would 
entail a dedicated dialogue during the interview between the magistrate and his head of court.  

9   The High Council calls for a more formalised dialogue between the court presidents and the Directorate of 
Judicial  Services  of  the  Ministry  of  Justice,  in  order  to  prevent  uncoordinated  decisions  undermining 
disciplinary  proceedings.  It  also  recommends  allowing  court  presidents  to  refer  matters  directly  to  the 
Inspectorate-General  of  Justice  for  the  purpose  of  initiating  an  administrative  inquiry,  whereas  this 
competence currently lies only  with the Minister of Justice. To address the inefficiencies of the individual 
complaints  mechanism,  it  is  proposed  to  endow  the  admissibility  committee  with  investigative  powers  to 
take the most informed decision possible.  

10   To this aim, it is suggested to clarify the definition of disciplinary misconducts, broadly defined in Article 43 
of Ordinance No. 58-1270 of 22 December 1958 on the organic law relating to the status of the judiciary, to 
explicitly mention a list of essential duties such as independence, impartiality, integrity, probity and loyalty. 
The High Council also recommends making the administrative investigation which may be brought by the 
Minister of Justice prior to disciplinary proceedings  more transparent and limited in time, as the length of 
disciplinary proceedings creates uncertainty for the magistrates concerned. Finally, it is proposed to reform 
and complement the scale of sanctions to better fit the various shortcomings targeted, notably by including 
penalties prohibiting certain appointments, temporary exclusion from any office or temporary removal from 
judicial functions. 

11   As  a  priority,  the  High  Council  proposes  to  allow  any  magistrate  seize  it  in  case  of  breach  of  his  or  her 
independence,  and  to  empower  the  Council  to  act  of  its  own  motion  in  such  a  case,  in  order  to  issue  a 
recommendation  to  put  an  end  to  the  violation.  This  recommendation  would  be  made  public  and  even 
published in the Official Journal in the most serious cases. This proposal echoes Recommendation CM/Rec 
(2010)12 of the Committee of Ministers of the  Council of  Europe of 17 November 2010, which provides: 
‘where  judges  consider  that  their  independence  is  threatened,  they  should  be  able  to  have  recourse  to  a 
council  for  the  judiciary  or  another  independent  authority  […]’.  It  is  also  proposed  to  introduce  a  15-day 
deadline for the Minister of Justice to decide on a request for functional protection presented by a magistrate. 
A tacit refusal could be challenged before an administrative court, which could order to grant the requested 
protection. The Ministry of Justice would moreover be entrusted with taking all necessary steps to remove 
offensive and/or illegal publications on social media, including at the request of the magistrate concerned or 
a court president. 

12   2021 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in France, p. 3. 
13   In  practice,  the  Minister  of  Justice  always  follows  the  non-binding  opinion  of  the  High  Council  on  the 

appointment of prosecutors, but there is no obligation to do so under positive law. 

4 

 
                                                 
recommendations  from  the  Group  of  States  against  Corruption  (GRECO)14  and  recent 
proposals by the National Conference of Prosecutors, which called for a reform of the statute 
of  prosecutors  to  increase  their  independence15.  In  a  decision  of  14  September  2021,  the 
Constitutional Council declared constitutional the provisions allowing general prosecutors to 
communicate specific reports relating to ongoing legal proceedings to the Minister of Justice, 
as the latter may not issue any instruction to public prosecutors in individual cases even when 
he or she requests or receives such specific reports16. 

In 202017, the Minister of Justice decided, on the recommendation of his administration, 
to order administrative investigations18 against several magistrates for alleged breaches 
of  ethical  obligations19,  and  this  decision  is  currently  being  examined  by  the  Court  of 
Justice of the Republic (CJR). Three magistrates’ associations had filed a complaint against 
the  Minister  of  Justice,  alleging  a  conflict  of  interest  related  to  his  previous  professional 
activity as a lawyer. The Minister of Justice transferred to the Prime Minister the competence 
to act in cases in which he was previously involved as a lawyer20. On 16 July 2021, following 
a hearing, the CJR21 indicted the Minister of Justice for illegal taking of interest. The Minister 
of Justice was heard before the CJR and exercised his right to remain silent, as he considered 
that the investigation methods were not impartial22. The case is still pending23. The General 

14   GRECO noted with concern the absence of progress on the constitutional reform that would have addressed 
its  recommendation  to  align  the  appointment  rules  and  disciplinary  procedure  for  prosecutors  with  those 
applicable  for  judges.  It  highlighted  the  paramount  importance  of  this  matter  and  invited  the  French 
authorities  to  accelerate  the  procedure  and  give  effect  to  this  recommendation  as  soon  as  possible.  See 
GRECO Fourth Evaluation Round - Addendum to the Second Compliance Report, pp. 10-11.  

15   In the  first of its ten proposals  for the  future of criminal justice, adopted in November 2021, the National 
Conference  of  Prosecutors  highlights  the  need  for  stronger  safeguards  as  regards  the  appointment  of 
prosecutors,  by  transferring  this  competence  to  the  High  Council  of  the  Judiciary,  to  guarantee  their 
independence. 

16   Decision  No.  2021-927  QPC  of  14  September  2021.  The  Constitutional  Council  considered  that  the 
contested  provisions  ensure  an  adequate  balance  between  the  principle  of  judicial  independence  and  the 
competence of the Minister of Justice to determine the policy on criminal matters, for which he must have 
access to reliable and complete information on the functioning of justice.  

17   2021 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in France, p. 3. 
18  According  to  the  case  law  of  the  Council  of  State,  the  opening  of  an  administrative  enquiry,  which  is  a 

preliminary step to disciplinary proceedings, is a decision with no negative impact on its addressee. 

19  Whilst the General Inspection of Justice concluded that the magistrates concerned had acted in accordance 
with the law, the Prime Minister, to whom the Minister of Justice reattributed the cases, seized, on the basis 
of  the  administrative  investigation,  the  High  Council  for  the  Judiciary  to  assess  whether  the  magistrates 
concerned had violated their duties. See press releases of the French Government of 17 April 2021 and 15 
September 2021. 

20  2021 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in France, p. 3. 
21   This special court, composed of six members of the Senate, six members of the National Assembly and three 
judges  of  the  Court  of  Cassation,  is  competent  to  hear  criminal  cases  relating  to  acts  of  members  of  the 
Government  in  the  exercise  of  their  functions.  A  constitutional  reform  tabled  in  Parliament  on  29  August 
2019, which was not adopted, envisaged to abolish the CJR and to transfer its competence to the Paris Court 
of Appeal. See 2021 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in France, p. 3. 

22   The Minister issued the following statement: https://www.lopinion.fr/politique/dupond-moretti-a-la-cour-de-
justice-de-la-republique-tout-demontre-votre-determination-a-me-salir.  In  a  press  release  of  4  March  2022, 
the first President of the Court of Cassation regretted this statement, considering that it questioned the ethics 
of the investigating magistrates, and contributed to weakening the judicial authority. 

23  On 10 May 2022, the General Prosecutor requested to initiate the trial phase against the Minister of Justice. 

The investigation commission of the CJR will have to decide on whether to open the trial phase. 

5 

 
                                                 
Prosecutor decided not to refer to the CJR a third complaint lodged by a magistrates’ trade 
union regarding an investigation into the management of a Court of Appeal24. 

A  Law  for  trust  in  the  justice  system  introduced  new  safeguards  for  professional 
secrecy, ethics and disciplinary procedures concerning lawyers. The new law25 adopted in 
December 2021 supplements the Code of Criminal Procedure by reaffirming the protection of 
professional secrecy both for defence and counsel activities. In particular, a judge can order a 
search of premises of  a  law firm  or of a lawyer’s  residence on the  condition that there is  a 
reasonable  ground  to  suspect  that  the  lawyer  has  committed  or  attempted  to  commit  the 
offence  which  is  the  subject  of  the  proceedings26.  Furthermore,  the  magistrate  carrying  out 
the search must ensure that the investigation does not interfere with the free exercise of the 
profession  of  lawyer  and  that  no  document  pertaining  to  the  exercise  of  the  rights  of  the 
defence and covered by the obligation of professional secrecy is seized. The most important 
proposals  made  by  the  National  Council  of  Bars,  and  particularly  the  wish  to  extend  the 
provisions on professional secrecy to the counsel activities of lawyers27, were included in the 
final version of the law. This is also in line with the preoccupations of lawyers at European 
level on the protection of professional secrecy. As regards disciplinary procedures, the new 
provisions  offer  more  guarantees  to  the  parties  involved  and  leave  more  room  for 
conciliation.  The  Disciplinary  Board  becomes  a  court,  chaired  by  a  judge  in  some  cases28. 
With regard to claims brought by individuals, where the nature of the complaint so permits, a 
conciliation procedure may be organised between the parties, with the participation of at least 
one lawyer29. To prevent disciplinary offences, Article 42 of the law foresees the creation of a 
code  of  ethics  for  lawyers  prepared  by  the  National  Council  of  Bars,  thus  maintaining  the 
self-regulation of the profession as regards ethical duties.  

Quality  

The  Court  of  Audit  highlighted  difficulties  in  the  implementation  of  key  projects  to 
increase  the  digitalisation  of  civil  and  criminal  justice.  Despite  efforts  to  improve 
digitalisation of the justice system and some progress already made, room for improvement 
remains regarding the use of digital tools both within courts and the prosecution service30 and 
in electronic communication with users31. In a report32, presented to the Senate on 26 January 
2022,  and  based  on  an  assessment  of  the  situation  in  spring  2021,  the  Court  of  Audit 
describes  the  delays  and  strategic  issues  encountered  in  the  implementation  of  the  plan  to 

24   The investigation  was ordered by the Prime Minister,  to whom the Minister of Justice had  re-assigned the 
cases.  The  Prosecutor  General  concluded  there  was  no  sufficient  evidence  in  support  of  the  conflict  of 
interests alleged in the complaint to refer it to the CJR.  

25   Law n. 2021-1729 of 22 December 2021 for trust in the justice system. 
26   The  search  warrant  may  be  appealed  with  suspensive  effect  within  24  hours  by  the  Public  Prosecutor,  the 

lawyer or the representative of the Bar. 

27   Resolution of the General Assembly of the National Council of Bars of 17 September 2021.  
28   It will be so where disciplinary proceedings follow a complaint lodged by a third party or at the request of 
the  lawyer.  The  recusal  or  removal  of  a  member  of  the  disciplinary  court  may  be  requested.  Similarly, 
appeals  against  decisions  of  Regional  Disciplinary  Councils  will  be  heard  by  the  courts  of  appeal,  with  a 
panel composed of three judges and two members of the Bar Council. 

29   If conciliation fails, the complainant is informed without delay of the possibility of referring his complaint to 
the Prosecutor General at the Court of Appeal or of bringing the matter directly before a disciplinary court. 

30   Figure 43, 2022 EU Justice Scoreboard. 
31   Figures 42, 44, 45, 46, and 47, 2022 EU Justice Scoreboard. 
32   Court  of  Audit,  Communication  to  the  Finance  Committee  of  the  Senate,  ‘Improving  the  functioning  of 

justice – stage point of the digital transformation plan of the Ministry of Justice’.  

6 

 
                                                 
digitalise justice initiated in 2018 and makes a number of recommendations to make it more 
effective.  The  Court  of  Audit  assesses  that,  at  this  stage,  one  year  before  the  end  of  its 
implementation, the digital transformation plan started in 2018 brought mixed results and that 
not  all  objectives  will  be  achieved33.  In  particular,  the  Court  of  Audit  noted  that  the  key 
projects for digitalisation of justice, namely the Procédure pénale numérique (digital criminal 
procedure),  Cassiopée,  which is  central to  the digital  treatment  of criminal  procedures, and 
Portalis,  an  ambitious  project  to  digitalise  all  stages  of  the  civil  procedure34,  have 
accumulated  delays  and  budget  overruns.  The  Court  of  Audit  suggests  improving  the 
governance of structuring projects35 to avoid delays in their implementation. The Ministry of 
Justice  endorsed  in  large  part  the  findings  of  the  report36  and  has  already  taken  some 
measures  to  improve  the  governance  of  projects,  for  instance  by  systematising  cost-benefit 
analyses.  Since  the  analysis  of  the  Court  of  Audit,  other  improvements  have  been  made  as 
regards the digital criminal procedure, for instance by relieving court officials of burdensome 
registration  tasks  and  by  allowing  for  digital  communication  with  lawyers37.  However, 
further  steps  remain  to  be  taken  to  follow  up  on  the  Court  of  Audit’s  recommendations,  in 
particular  to  centralise  the  overall  monitoring  of  projects  by  reducing  outsourcing,  in 
particular project  management functions, in  order to  retain control  over the development  of 
information systems. 

Digital tools at the disposal of litigants and justice professionals continue being deployed 
successfully.  As mentioned  in  the  2021  Rule  of  Law  Report38,  the  deployment  in  legal  aid 
offices  of  the  Legal  Aid  Information  System  (SIAJ),  which  allows  individuals  to  make  a 
paperless  application  for  legal  aid,  started  in  two  pilot  courts  from  March  to  October  2021 
and is advancing at a steady pace. At the end of 2021, 30% of the courts were equipped, and 
it is planned that 90% of the courts will  have the system implemented by  mid-2022. It was 
reported that, in courts where SIAJ was already implemented, the time needed to process the 
legal  aid  application  was  on  average  reduced  by  two  thirds39.  As  regards  the  online 
accessibility of  court decisions, all judgments delivered publicly by the  Court of Cassation, 
the  Council  of  State,  all  administrative  courts  of  first  instance  and  appeal,  as  well  as  the 
courts of appeal for civil, commercial and social litigation are now accessible through open 
data40.  Room  for  improvement  still  remains  as  regards  the  publication  of  other  court 

33   One  of  the  impediments  described  for  the  timely  implementation  of  the  plan  was  the  emergence  of  new 
needs in the area of information systems security. Similarly, several reforms adopted in the meantime had a 
strong  impact  on  implementation  of  the  plan,  as  they  were  adopted  taking  insufficient  account  of  the 
Ministry  of  Justice’s  capacity  to  set  up  or  adapt  the  information  systems  needed  to  implement  them. 
According  to  the  Court  of  Audit,  this  has  led  to  delays  between  the  date  of  entry  into  force  of  certain 
provisions and the introduction of the digital tools needed to manage them. 

34   2021 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in France, pp. 4-5. 
35   The recommendations included entrusting the operational responsibility for each of them to a single project 
manager  mastering  all  parameters,  in  particular  the  budget,  and  involving  end  users  in  the  various 
information systems steering bodies. 

36   Written contribution from the Ministry of Justice in the context of the country visit to France. 
37  Information received from the Ministry of Justice in the context of the country visit to France. 
38   2021 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in France, p. 5. 
39   Information received from the Ministry of Justice in the context of the country visit to France. 
40   Art. 33 of Law of 23 March 2019 on programming 2018-2022 and reform for justice and Decree n 2020-797 
of  29  June  2020,  relating  to  the  public  availability  of  the  decisions  of  the  judicial  and  administrative 
jurisdictions, gave the Conseil d’État and the Cour de cassation the responsibility to ensure this availability. 
According  to  an  Order  of  28  April  2021,  the  online  availability  is  scheduled  to  be  ensured  as  follows: 
Council of State and Court of Cassation in September 2021; Administrative courts of appeal on March 2022; 
courts of appeal in civil, social and commercial matters in April 2022; administrative courts of first instance 

7 

 
                                                 
 
judgments, particularly from lower court instances41, and work is ongoing on the adaptation 
of  the  pseudonymisation  artificial  intelligence  engine,  for  the  publication  of  judgements  of 
courts  of  first  instance  in  commercial,  civil  and  labour  matters  as  well  as  for  criminal 
proceedings. 

The resources allocated to the justice system  have been increased for the second year, 
and  magistrates  have  called  for  further  efforts  to  continue  ensuring  the  quality  of 
justice.  In  2020,  the  expenditure  for  the  justice  system  was  relatively  low,  in  comparative 
terms,  despite  an  increase  compared  to  201942.  In  2022,  the  budget  dedicated  to  the  justice 
system  was  further  increased  by  3.4%  as  compared  with  2021,  thus  reaching  EUR  3 849 
million. The budget allocated to legal aid also grew from EUR 585 million in 2021 to EUR 
615.2  million  in  2022.  In  addition,  1  414  of  the  short-term  contractual  positions  created  in 
2021,  including  assistant  lawyers  working  under  magistrates,  will  be  made  permanent43. 
However, the High Council for the Judiciary highlighted that the budget allocated by France 
to the justice system and the number of magistrates per inhabitant remains substantially lower 
than  that  of  other  European  countries  with  a  comparable  GDP  and  called  for  additional 
regulatory  safeguards  to  further  stabilise  the  annual  budget  allocated  to  justice44.  The  High 
Council  also  recommends  reforming  the  status  and  the  missions  of  the  team  assisting  the 
magistrates,  which  would  allow  judges  and  prosecutors  to  focus  more  on  their  judicial 
functions and therefore contribute to the quality of justice45. In an open letter published in a 
national  newspaper,  a  large  number  of  magistrates  described  the  worsening  working 
conditions in many courts, in particular because of the insufficient human resources and the 
comparatively  excessive  workload,  forcing  them  to  sacrifice  quality  for  the  sake  of 
expediency46.  

A comprehensive consultation on the justice system took place to identify relevant issues 
and reforms needed to address them. On 18 October 2021, the President of the Republic 
opened  the  Estates  General  of  Justice47.  The  first  president  and  the  attorney  general  of  the 
Court  of  Cassation  had  previously  expressed  concerns  about  a  ’systematic  questioning  of 

in June 2022; labour courts,  commercial courts,  courts of  first  instance in civil  matters  and  in all criminal 
proceedings between 2023 and 2025. 

41   Figures 48 and 49, 2022 EU Justice Scoreboard. 
42   In 2020, the General government total expenditure on law courts as a percentage of GDP was sixth lowest in 

the EU (data from Eurostat). Figure 35, 2022 EU Justice Scoreboard.  

43   Written contribution from the  French authorities  in the context of the country  visit to France, pp. 5-6. The 
overall budget for justice, which includes the budget allocated to other items than the justice system, such as 
prisons, increased by 8% since 2021. 

44   Written  contribution  of  the  High  Council  for  the  Judiciary  for  the  Estates  General  of  Justice,  31  January 

2021, pp. 27-29.  

45   The  CSM  recommends  increasing  the  stability  and  professionalism  of  the  magistrates’  assistants,  by 
harmonising their status and entrusting their training to the National Institute for the Magistracy. Magistrates 
would  also  be  closely  associated  in  their  recruitment  and  appraisal.  See  written  contribution  of  the  High 
Council for the Judiciary for the Estates General of Justice, 31 January 2021, pp. 30-32. 

46   The open letter, published in newspaper Le Monde, was originally signed by 3 000 magistrates and around 
100  registrars,  and  was  later  endorsed  by  more  than  5 500  magistrates.  Following  its  publication,  the 
Minister of Justice met a group of various magistrates and committed to maintaining this direct dialogue.  
47   This nation-wide consultation directed both at the general public and justice professionals is directed by an 
independent  committee  entrusted  with  drafting  a  final  report  summarizing  the  relevant  conclusions.  The 
consultation process is described in more detail in section four below. 

8 

 
                                                                                                                                                        
justice’48. This nationwide consultation, associating law professionals and the general public, 
is  aimed  at  taking  stock  of  the  situation  of  justice  and  formulating  concrete  proposals  to 
remedy any outstanding issues49. An online consultation took place and several conferences 
were organised. A final report was drafted by an independent committee, on the basis of the 
numerous contributions received and will be presented by the President of the Republic50. 

The  Law  for  trust  in  the  justice  system  reinforces  the  provisions  for  voluntary 
mediation  as  an  alternative  to  court  proceedings.  Article  45  of  that  law51  establishes  a 
National  Mediation  Council52  whose  main  missions  are 
issue  opinions  and 
recommendations to the public authorities in the field of mediation, draft a compendium of 
ethics applicable to mediation, design national frameworks for the training of mediators, and 
make proposals on the conditions for the registration of mediators. The law also makes more 
effective the contracts  establishing an agreement  resulting  from  mediation, conciliation  and 
participatory  procedures  in  providing  that,  where  they  are  countersigned  by  lawyers  and 
authenticated  by  the  registry  of  the  competent  court,  transactions  and  other  agreements 
reached  during  mediation,  conciliation  or  participatory  procedures  become  enforceable 
instruments. Promotion and incentives for using Alternative-Dispute Resolution methods are 
relatively developed, in comparative terms, but room for improvement remains53. 

to 

Efficiency 

The length of court proceedings in civil, commercial and administrative cases, measured 
in  disposition  time,  increased  sharply  over  the  last  year,  with  the  exception  of 
administrative  cases,  where  the  situation  remained  stable54.  In  particular,  the  estimated 
time  needed  to  resolve  litigious  civil  and  commercial  cases  at  first  instance  increased  from 
432 days in 2019 to 637 days in 2020, one of the highest values in the EU55. The number of 
pending  court  cases  increased  slightly  but  remained  stable  overall56.  The  clearance  rate, 
showing how the court system deals with caseload, decreased considerably, in particular for 
litigious civil and commercial cases, where it diminished from close to 100% to below 93%57. 
As mentioned above, several judicial institutions have pointed to a need to recruit additional 
staff within the justice system, more particularly within courts58 and prosecution services59, to 

48   In particular, during a demonstration that took place on  19 May 2021 in front of the Parliament gathering 
law  enforcement  officers  as  well  as  some  members  of  Parliament,  the  justice  system  was  criticised  for  its 
alleged slowness and laxity, which was perceived by the judiciary as an attack on judicial independence. 

49   Press release of the Presidency of the Republic of 18 October 2021.  
50  See also Pillar IV below on the consultation process. 
51   Law n. 2021-1729 of 22 December 2021 for trust in the justice system. 
52   The National Mediation Council  will be composed of qualified persons and representatives of associations 

involved in mediation, administrations, courts and the legal professions.  

53   Figure 29, 2022 EU Justice Scoreboard. 
54   Figures 6-10, 2022 EU Justice Scoreboard. 
55   Figure 7, 2022 EU Justice Scoreboard. 
56   Figures 14-16, 2022 EU Justice Scoreboard. 
57   Figures 11-13, 2022 EU Justice Scoreboard. 
58   Written  contribution  of  the  High  Council  for  the  Judiciary  for  the  Estates  General  of  Justice,  31  January 

2021, pp. 29-33. 

59   In the second of its ten proposals for the future of criminal justice, adopted in November 2021, the National 
Conference of Prosecutors highlights that, as evaluated by the European Commission for the Efficiency of 
Justice (CEPEJ), the number of prosecutors per inhabitant in France is among the lowest in Europe, at 3 for 
100 000 inhabitants, with a high caseload and number of competences. 

9 

 
                                                 
be able to  deal  effectively  and sustainably with  the caseload60. To this end, the Ministry  of 
Justice is currently developing a measuring tool to evaluate precisely the mid and long-term 
recruitment needs61. Moreover, 1914 contractual agents have been recruited to deal with the 
backlog  of  pending  cases.  The  Ministry  of  Justice  has  reported  that,  from  2021  onwards,  a 
significant  decrease  in  the  number  of  pending  cases  was  recorded.  In  parallel,  the  National 
Conference  of  Presidents  of  Judicial  Courts  has  developed  and  made  public  its  own 
measuring tool designed to assess precisely the workload of judges by taking into account all 
their current attributions and missions62. From the first evaluation carried out by two thirds of 
courts on this basis, it is argued that 1 500 additional first instance judges would be necessary 
to  deal  sustainably  with  the  current  workload,  and  the  measuring  tool  developed  by  the 
Ministry of Justice would allow to refine this assessment63. 

II. 

ANTI-CORRUPTION FRAMEWORK  

Authorities  involved  in  the  fight  against  corruption  include  the  French  Anti-Corruption 
Agency (AFA, which prepares the multiannual anti-corruption plan and supports private and 
public  legal  persons  on  how  to  prevent  and  detect  corruption),  the  High  Authority  for  the 
Transparency of Public life (responsible for ensuring the integrity of public officials), and the 
Central Office for Combating Corruption and Tax Offences (a specialised police service for 
the  investigation  of  economic  crimes,  including  corruption  and  money  laundering).  The 
National  Financial  Prosecutor  is  competent  for  the  investigation  of  high-level  corruption 
cases. 

The  perception  of  public  sector  corruption  among  experts  and  business  executives  is 
that the level of corruption in the public sector is relatively low.  In the 2021 Corruption 
Perceptions  Index by Transparency  International, France scores 71/100  and ranks 8th  in  the 
European Union and 22nd globally64. This perception has been relatively stable over the past 
five years65. The 2022 Special Eurobarometer on Corruption shows that 64% of respondents 

60   Paras.  33  and  35  of  Recommendation  CM/Rec(2010)12  of  the  Committee  of  Ministers  of  the  Council  of 
Europe, state that ‘[e]ach state should allocate adequate resources, facilities and equipment to the courts to 
enable them to function in accordance  with the  standards laid down in  Article 6 of the  Convention and to 
enable  judges  to  work  efficiently’  and  that  ‘[a]  sufficient  number  of  judges  and  appropriately  qualified 
support staff should be allocated to the courts’. 

61   Since 2019, the Ministry of Justice has been carrying out work aimed at better evaluating the activity of the 
courts in order to calculate the resulting need for the number of public prosecutors, by equipping itself with a 
national management tool based on a court case weighting system. This project is led by the Directorate of 
Judicial Services with the support of the General Inspectorate of Justice, in close consultation with the trade 
unions  and  public  prosecutors.  The  objective  is  to  assess  precisely  the  workload  implied  by  a  case,  by 
associating  it  with  an  average  time  necessary  for  its  processing.  See  written  contribution  from  the  French 
authorities in the context of the country visit to France, pp. 4-5.  

62   This  tool  for  managing  the  human  resources  of  all  courts  (except  the  Paris  Tribunal,  which  has  its  own 
assessment methods due to its specificities), requested on numerous occasions by the Court of Audit, will be 
reviewed annually. It is supplemented by a projection table of the needs for magistrates in each court. See 
National Conference of Presidents of Judicial Courts, press release of 16 February 2022.  
63   National Conference of Presidents of Judicial Courts, press release of 16 February 2022. 
64   Transparency  International  (2022),  Corruption  Perceptions  Index  2021,  pp.  2-3.  The  level  of  perceived 
corruption  is  categorised  as  follows:  low  (the  perception  among  experts  and  business  executives  of  public 
sector  corruption scores  above  79);  relatively  low  (scores  between  79-60),  relatively  high  (scores  between 
59-50), high (scores below 50). 

65   In 2017 the score was 70, while in 2021 the score is 71. The score significantly increases/decreases when it 
changes  more  than  five  points;  improves/deteriorates  (changes  between  4-5  points);  is  relatively  stable 
(changes from 1-3 points) in the last five years. 

10 

 
                                                 
consider corruption as widespread in their country (EU average 68%) and 7% of respondents 
feel  personally  affected  by  corruption  in  their  daily  lives  (EU  average  24%)66.  As  regards 
businesses, 50% of companies consider that corruption is widespread (EU average 63%) and 
31%  consider  that  corruption  is  a  problem  when  doing  business  (EU  average  34%)67. 
Furthermore, 23% of respondents find that there are enough successful prosecutions to deter 
people  from  corrupt  practices  (EU  average  34%)68,  while  37%  of  companies  believe  that 
people  and  businesses  caught  for  bribing  a  senior  official  are  appropriately  punished  (EU 
average 29%)69.  

The national anti-corruption plan for 2020-2022 continues to be implemented. The anti-
corruption  plan70  sets  eight  objectives  that  include  the  prevention  of  corruption  in  the 
organisation  of  two  major  international  sport  events,  whose  preparation  is  underway71. The 
report on the final implementation of the anti-corruption plan is expected to be prepared by 
the Anti-Corruption Agency by the end of 2022, concurrently with the preparation of the next 
national anti-corruption plan (post-2022)72. 

Legislative  steps  have  been  taken  to  improve  the  legal  anti-corruption  framework73. 
Following  the  recommendations  indicated  through  the  report  delivered  in  July  2021  by  the 
Law  Commission  of  the  Parliament74,  a  new  draft  anti-corruption  law  was  tabled  in 
Parliament  in  October  2021,  with  both  preventive  and  repressive  provisions,  notably  on 

66   Special  Eurobarometer  523  on  Corruption  (2022).  The  Eurobarometer  data  on  citizens’  corruption 
perception and experience is updated every second year. The previous data set is the Special Eurobarometer 
502 (2020). 

67   Flash Eurobarometer 507 on Businesses’ attitudes towards corruption in the EU (2022). The Eurobarometer 
data on business attitudes towards corruption as is updated every second year. The previous data set is the 
Flash Eurobarometer 482 (2019). 

68   Special Eurobarometer 523 on Corruption (2022).  
69   Flash Eurobarometer 507 on Businesses’ attitudes towards corruption in the EU (2022).  
70   The  plan  focuses  on  the  following  actions:  i)  optimising  data  analysis  to  improve  understanding  and 
detection of corruption; ii) training and awareness-raising for public employees; iii-a) supporting ministries 
to  establish  anti-corruption  programmes;  iii-b)  support  major  municipalities  and  their  establishments  to 
establish  anti-corruption  programmes;  iii-c)  promoting  integrity  in  sports  organisations  and  events;  iii-d) 
supporting businesses in implementing the French anti-corruption framework and encouraging them to make 
anti-corruption compliance a means of boosting their competitiveness; iii-e) enhancing corruption penalties; 
and iv) enhancing France’s international action.  2021 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of 
law situation in France, p. 7. 

71   The Rugby World Cup in 2023 and the Paris Olympic and Paralympic Games in 2024.  2021 Rule of Law 
Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in France, p. 7. Input from France for the 2022 Rule of 
Law Report, p. 9.  

72   There  are  ongoing  discussions  between  an  inter-ministerial  committee  (led  by  the  French  Anti-Corruption 
Agency, AFA) and some stakeholders (including NGOs) on the actions to be included in the next national 
anticorruption plan. Information received in the context of the country visit to France from the AFA. 

73   Laws (including the Law 2016-1691 of 9 December 2016, on transparency, the fight against corruption and 
the  modernisation  of  economic  life,  known  as  ‘Sapin  II’)  are  in  place  in  France  to  prevent  and  fight 
corruption in the private and public sector, including whistle-blowers protection, assets declaration, lobbying 
and ‘revolving doors’. 2020 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in France, pp. 
5-8. 

74   National Assembly, Law Commission, Information Report No. 4325, 7 July 2021, concluding the work of an 
information  mission  evaluating  the  impact  of  the  Sapin  2  Act,  presented  by  Mr  Raphaël  Gauvain  and  Mr 
Olivier Marleix, Rapporteurs, Deputies. 

11 

 
                                                 
combating  corruption,  breach  of  integrity,  negotiated  settlements,  and  a  register  for 
lobbying75.  

The conviction of high-level corruption cases continues to bring tangible results despite 
challenges linked to the limited resources as well as structural weaknesses. The Central 
Office  for  Combating  Corruption  and  Tax  Offences (OCLCIFF)76  remains  responsible  for 
investigation  of  high-level  corruption  cases.  The  staff  available  to  the  office  (78  officers) 
compared to the workload (250 ongoing cases) is a point of concern77. The National Financial 
Prosecutor’s  Office  (PNF)  issued  forty  convictions  in  2021,  approved  12  individual 
appearances  on prior admission of guilt  (CRPC)78, and concluded three judicial  agreements 
of public interest  (CJIPs) (for a combined amount  of fines of nearly  EUR 45  million), plus 
two other criminal compositions79. In the same year, the PNF recovered a total of EUR 173.1 
million80.  In  August  2021,  the  Government  adopted  a  simplification  of  the  public  interest 
judicial  agreements81.  Following  a  ministerial  instruction  to  this  end,  the  number  of 
information feedbacks82 decreased (from 3 834 in 2021, to 1 854 as of April 2022)83. Despite 
the fact that in 2021 the workforce of the PNF grew from 17 to the current 18 magistrates84, 
the recommendation of the GRECO on the PNF workforce needs to be further addressed85. 

75   The bill nº 4586 for strengthening the  fight against corruption.  The proposed text confirms  the  role of the 
French Anti-Corruption Agency (AFA) in terms of  administrative coordination and strategic programming, 
and  transfers  to  the  High  Authority  for  the  Transparency  of  Public  Life  (HATVP)  the  functions  of  advice 
and control of public actors currently completed by the Agency. The AFA would thus remain competent in 
matters  of  advice  and  control  of  economic  actors.  It  also  aims  to  improve  the  use  and  functioning  of  the 
judicial  convention  of  public  interest  (CJIP).  Finally,  the  draft  text  increases  the  obligations  for  both 
lobbyists and public decision-makers. 

76   OCLCIFF is a specialised police service for the investigation of economic crimes, including corruption and 
money laundering. 2021 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in France, p.7. 
77   Information received from the Central Office for Combating Corruption and Tax Offences (OCLCIFF) in the 

context of the country visit to France. 

78   Comparution  sur  reconnaissance  préalable  de  culpabilité  (CRPC)  is  a  court  hearing  upon  pre-trial  guilty 
plea. CRPCs require companies and individuals  to plead guilty in exchange for terminating a prosecution. 
2021 National Financial Prosecutor’s Office (PNF) annual report. 

79   The  penal  composition  is  a  measure  taken  by  the  public  prosecutor  or  his  representative  within  the 
framework of alternative measures to prosecution, similar to a plea bargain. Input from France for the 2022 
Rule of Law Report, pp.17-18. 

80   Since  2014,  through  a  total  of  17  CJIPs  a  total  of  EUR  10  178  billion  were  recuperated  (including  9 
concluded by the PNF,  worth approximately EUR 2 billion). Input from France for the  2022 Rule of Law 
Report, p. 18. 

81   In  order  to  contain  corruption,  several  countries  have  developed  more  appropriate  legal  procedures,  in 
particular  plea-bargaining  arrangements  between  the  national  prosecution  authority  and  a  company.  In 
France, article 22 of Law no 2016-1691 of 9 December 2016 on  ‘transparency, combatting corruption and 
modernization  of  economic  life’  (commonly  called  ‘Sapin  II  Law’)  introduced  into  French  criminal  law  a 
new  transactional  procedure  instrument,  the  Judicial  Public  Interest  Agreement  (‘convention  judiciaire 
d'intérêt  public’,  CJIP).  Decree  No. 2021-1045  of  August  4,  2021  adapting  and  simplifying  the  procedure 
applicable  to  the  judicial  agreement  in  the  public  interest  and  relating  to  the  assignment  of  specialised 
assistants.  

82   The  remontée  d’information  is  a  practice  to  deliver  information  feedback  to  the  Ministry  of  Justice  on 

specific cases followed by prosecutors.  

83   The information feedback is done after the conclusion of the case, in a sanitized manner, for informative and 
statistical purposes only. Information received in the context of the country visit to France from the National 
Financial Prosecutor. 

84   The  staff  is  expected  to  reach  19  officers  at  the  end  of  September  2022.  Information  received  from  the 

National Financial Prosecutor in the context of the country visit to France. 

85   GRECO recommended that the National Financial Prosecution Office be provided with additional resources, 

specifically in terms of staff. GRECO Fifth Evaluation Round - Compliance Report, p. 13.  

12 

 
                                                 
Structural  challenges  affecting  the  criminal  process  of  foreign  bribery,  including  the 
operations  of  the  PNF  and  of  the  French  Anti-Corruption  Agency  (AFA)  have  to  be 
addressed86.  The  bill  adopted  by  the  Parliament  in  November  202187,  has  raised  some 
criticism related  to  the effective investigation of  foreign bribery88. Similarly, the legislative 
framework  on  the  criminalisation  of  corporate  liability  associated  to  foreign  bribery  shows 
some deficiencies89. 

The Anti-Corruption Agency continues to issue integrity guidelines for entities in both 
the  private  and  public  sectors.  In  2021,  the  Anti-Corruption  Agency  continued  to  issue  a 
series  of  subject-specific  guidelines90,  including  in  the  private  sector91,  developed  an 
awareness  exercise  on  anti-corruption  obligations92,  signed  institutional  memoranda  of 
understanding93, and delivered training to different stakeholders from the public and private 
sectors. Despite the decrease of personnel in 2021, the Agency considers the human resources 
available as sufficient overall94. Turnover, due to rotation of seconded positions, declined.  

The integrity of public officials continues to be monitored by the High Authority for the 
Transparency  of  Public  Life  (HATVP).  The  HATVP continues  advising  on  the  integrity 

86   Structural resource problems affect all stages of the criminal justice process. In particular, the limitation of 
the  duration  of  preliminary  investigations  to  two  or  three  years  (adopted  by  Parliament  on  18  November 
2021)  or  the  proposed  overhaul  of  the  AFA  and  its  remit  (a  Bill  was  introduced  on  21  October  2021), 
constitute a serious cause for concern about furthering recent progress and represent as many risks of calling 
these into question. The Implementing the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention, Phase 4 Report, France, adopted 
in December 2021, indicates, at page 55, that in the opinion of the investigative judges, the creation of the 
PNF  and  the  increase  in  the  number  of  economic  cases  have  not  been  accompanied  by  an  increase  in  the 
resources allocated to the competent investigative judges. Additionally, the same OECD report indicates that 
“The  limitation  of  the  duration  of  preliminary  investigations  to  two  or  three  years  (…)  could  result  in  the 
further  transfer  of  a  significant  number  of  economic  and  financial  cases  to  investigative  judges,  and  thus 
further exacerbate this situation”.  

87   Bill  on  ‘confidence  in  the  judiciary’,  adopted  by  Parliament  on  18  November  2021. The  bill  introduced  a 
statutory  limitation  regime  for  preliminary  investigations  of  foreign  bribery  and  related  offences  (such  as 
concealment or money laundering). 

88   It ‘appears to disregard the complex, multidimensional nature of foreign bribery investigations as well as the 
lack  of  resources  for  fighting  white-collar  crime  in  France’,  Implementing  the  OECD  Anti-Bribery 
Convention, Phase 4 Report, France, adopted in October 2021, p. 71. 

89   ‘Major difficulties remain, in particular in relation to the need to establish that the acts were committed by 
the  corporate  body  or  representative’.  Implementing  the  OECD  Anti-Bribery  Convention,  Phase  4  Report, 
France, adopted in December 2021.  

90   Among  others:  Implementation  of  a  corruption  risk  prevention  system  in  the  building  and  public  works 
sector  (February  2022);  Practical  guide  for  Associations  and  Foundations  recognised  as  being  of  public 
utility (January 2022); Control the risk of impact of probity within associations and recognised foundations 
of public utility (January 2022); Prevention of conflicts of interest in the company (November 2021). 

91   Two practical guides for operators in the  Ministry of Sport  and sports federations  were  developed and are 
expected to be published in the course of 2022. Input from France for the 2022 Rule of Law Report, p. 13. 
Concerning the private sector, two corporations based in France were sanctioned in early 2022 for corruptive 
practices in the context of international public procurement. See World Bank (2022),  Press release, World 
Bank  Group  Debars  ADP  International  S.A.,  and  World  Bank  (2022),  Press  release,  World  Bank  Group 
sanctions Bouygues Bâtiment International. 

92   ‘In  Search  of  Integrity’,  the  serious  corruption  prevention  awareness  game,  https://www.agence-francaise-
anticorruption.gouv.fr/fr/decouvrez-en-quete-dintegrite-jeu-serieux-sensibilisation-prevention-corruption. 
93   On  February  2022,  the  Inter-ministerial  Commission  for  the  Coordination  of  Controls  (CICC)  and  the 
French  Anti-Corruption  Agency  signed  a  cooperation  protocol  relating  to  the  implementation  of  the 
Recovery and Resilience Facility, the European component of the plan stimulus.  

94   As  the  experience  and  reputation  of  the  Agency  grows,  it  is  easier  to  attract  qualified  new  officers. 

Information received from AFA in the context of the country visit to France. 

13 

 
                                                 
rules  for  public  officials,  including  those  on  asset  disclosure95. In  2021,  from  the  15 574 
declarations  of  asset  and  interests  received,  it  only  examined  3 150  declarations,  and 
transmitted 11 files to the Public Prosecutor Office for further analyses of possible crimes96. 
For  the  same  year,  the  HATVP  assessed  around  19 000  reports  on  “revolving  doors”  (e.g. 
movement of professionals between the private and public sectors)97. 

While  controls  on  the  funds  of  politicians  and  political  parties  continue,  a  significant 
number  of  concerns  remain  as  regard  the  application  of  rules  on  lobbying  for  all 
relevant  actors,  including  at  top  executive  level.  In  2021,  the  National  Commission  on 
Campaign  Accounts  and  Political  Financing  (CNCCFP)  examined  in  total  approximately 
8 200  financial  statements  from  candidates  to  Senate  or  regional  elections  and  rejected  in 
total  582  financial  statements98.  The  HATVP  is  responsible  for  the  management  of  the 
lobbying register99. A GRECO recommendation on the disclosure of lobbying meetings with 
persons  who  are  entrusted  with  top  executive  functions  at  national  level  remains 
unaddressed100.  While  there  is  a  new  draft  anti-corruption  law  (see  above,  page  10),  the 
existing concerns on the type of lobbying activities and lobbyists remain unaddressed101. The 
fact  that  the  system  requires  the  declaration  of  many  lobbying  activities  (including  those 
occurring at local level), creates a significant workload for the HATVP, which lacks human 
and technical resources102. In 2021, a number of politically exposed persons were sentenced 
for  tax  fraud103.  In  the  first  compliance  report,  adopted  less  than  two  years  after  the 

95   2020 and 2021 Rule of Law Reports, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in France, p. 6 and p. 8 

respectively. 

96   Written contribution from High Authority for the Transparency of Public Life (HATVP) in the context of the 

country visit. 

97   The results of the controls are the following: 10% of the cases were incompatible; 64% of the cases received 
an  advice  of  compatibility,  with  condition;  24%  of  the  cases  received  a  simple  advice.  Decisions  on 
compatibility are binding for three years. Information received in the context of the country visit to France 
from the High Authority for the Transparency of Public Life (HATVP). 

98   Starting with the Presidential election of April 2022, a new software (called FINPOL) is used to check the 
financial  and  interest  statements  of  the  12  candidates,  with  publication  of  this  assessment  (except  for 
personal sensitive data) expected one  month after the elections. Information received in  the context of the 
country  visit  to  France  from  the  National  Commission  on  Campaign  Accounts  and  Political  Financing 
(CNCCFP). 

99   The  HATVP  provides  an  opinion  prior  to  the  recruitment  for  a  high-level  public  position  of  a  person 
formerly  employed  in  the  private  sector,  which  will  determine  the  recruitment.  Before  the  appointment  of 
any member of the Government and in relation to the person whose appointment is envisaged, the President 
of  the  Republic  may  request  from  the  President  of  the  HATVP  information  indicating,  on  the  date  of  the 
request and taking into account the information available to the HATVP, whether this person is in a situation 
that  may  constitute  a  conflict  of  interest,  as  well  as  the  measures  necessary  to  prevent  or  take  action 
immediately  to  end  this  conflict  of  interest.  2020  and  2021  Rule  of  Law  Reports,  Country  Chapter  on  the 
rule of law situation in France, p. 6 and p. 9 respectively. 
100  GRECO Fifth Evaluation Round - Compliance Report, p. 8. 
101  The definition of lobbyist only includes entities, and not individuals. There is a risk that the current system 
might  unfairly  benefit  large  existing  lobbying  entities  (which  have  well-established  relationships  with 
decision-makers),  and  disadvantage  small  or  new  lobbying  entities  (which  must  establish  and  initiate 
lobbying relationships with decision-makers). The proposal presented by the High Authority on this matter 
was not taken into consideration in the new draft law on post-Sapin II. Information received in the context of 
the  country  visit  to  France  from  the  High  Authority  for  the  Transparency  of  Public  Life  (HATVP).  2021 
Rule of Law Reports, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in France, pp. 1 and 9. 

102  Currently the High Authority has a staff of 67 officers, a budget of EUR 9 million for 2022, and technical 
resources (like software used to check asset and lobbying declaration) are insufficient. Information received 
in  the  context  of  the  country  visit  to  France  from  the  High  Authority  for  the  Transparency  of  Public  Life 
(HATVP). 

103  Information received in the context of the country visit to France from the Ministry of Justice. 

14 

 
                                                 
evaluation  report,  GRECO  stated  that  nine  recommendations  were  considered  as  partly 
implemented and that eight had not been implemented104. Therefore, progress will have to be 
made regarding codes of conduct (for persons who are entrusted with top executive functions 
at  national  level)105,  on  the  verification  and  accessibility  of  declarations  of  assets  (of  the 
presidential  candidate,  of  persons  with  top  executive  functions106,  as  well  as  those  filed  by 
members of the National Assembly and Senators)107, on conflicts of interests108, as well as on 
examination of cases of corruption affecting members of the Government109. 

Integrity  rules  for  members  of  the  Parliament  and  the  Senate  continue  to  be 
implemented.  In  2021,  the  Commission  for  Ethics  of  the  National  Assembly110  issued  50 
individual  opinions,  responded  to  about  443  requests  for  clarification  on  the  use  of  funds 
during the presidential electoral campaign111, and verified financial statements of members of 
the  Parliament  (150  statements  for  the  year  2020,  and  50  for  2021),  where  only  minor 
violations  were  found112.  In  2021,  only  minor  breaches  of  conflict  of  interest  rules  were 
identified.  In  January  2022,  the  Parliament  adopted  a  new  code  of  conduct,  with  amended 
provisions  on  lobbying  activities113.  The  Ethics  Committee  of  the  Senate  is  the  body 
responsible for ethics of Senators.114  

While  integrity  provisions  are  implemented  across  the  public  sector,  the  need  to 
improve  integrity-related  security  checks  in  the  police  and  the  disciplinary  authority 
over  judges  remain.  Police  staff  receives  targeted  anti-corruption  training  and  awareness 
material115. The national gendarmerie organises trainings on ethics for the military personnel 
at all levels116. A Deontology Action Plan, with anti-corruption measures, is being finalised 
by 
the  GRECO 
recommendation  to  carry  out  security  checks  relating  to  the  integrity  of  members  of  the 
National  Police  and  the  National  Gendarmerie  at  regular  intervals  remains  unaddressed118. 

the  Gendarmerie117.  Nevertheless, 

Inspectorate  General  of 

the 

104  The  GRECO  report 

implemented  satisfactorily 
(recommendation  about  confidentiality  of  advisory  procedures  with  ethics  advisers/correspondents,  and 
specific training for ethics advisers/correspondents). GRECO Fifth Evaluation Round - Compliance Report, 
p. 15. 

that  one  recommendation  had  been 

indicated 

105  GRECO Fifth Evaluation Round - Compliance Report, p. 6. 
106  GRECO Fifth Evaluation Round - Compliance Report, pp. 9-10. 
107  GRECO Fourth Evaluation Round - Addendum to the Second Compliance Report, p. 7. 
108  To guarantee transparency on cases of conflict of interests for the Prime Minister. 
109  GRECO Fourth Evaluation Round - Addendum to the Second Compliance Report, pp. 11-12. 
110  Responsible to monitoring the implementation of the code of conduct for parliamentarians. 
111  The  frequently  asked  questions  and  responses,  are  published  in  the  National  Assembly  intranet,  and  are 
accessible  to  MPs.  Information  received  in  the  context  of  the  country  visit  to  France  from  the  Ethics 
Commissioner of the National Assembly. 

112  The violations found prompted to recover 2% of the public funds previously allocated to MPs.  Information 
received  in  the  context  of  the  country  visit  to  France  from  the  Ethics  Commissioner  of  the  National 
Assembly. 

113  Code  of  Conduct  of  Deputies  (New  version  resulting  from  the  Bureau  meeting  of  February  21,  2022). 
Lobbyists must inform the Members of the Parliament of the value of the gifts provided and cannot pay MPs 
advisers  for  lobbying  activity.  Information  received  in  the  context  of  the  country  visit  to  France  from  the 
Ethics Commissioner of the National Assembly. 

114  In accordance with the order No. 58-1100 of November 17, 1958 relating to the functioning of parliamentary 

assemblies.  

115  Input from France for the 2022 Rule of Law Report, p. 10.  
116  These actions will be probably used to reassess the previous recommendation from GRECO to improve the 

anticorruption training of law enforcement authorities, will have to be re-assessed. 

117  Input from the France for the 2022 Rule of Law Report, p. 10.  
118  GRECO Fifth Evaluation Round - Compliance Report, p. 15. 

15 

 
                                                 
The national school of magistrates organises trainings on anti-corruption. Following a request 
from  the  President  of  the  Republic119,  in  September  2021  the  High  Council  of  Magistrates 
(CSM) issued a series of proposals  on ethics120. When members of the judiciary move to  a 
new  position,  they  must  declare  their  assets  and  attend  a  meeting  to  discuss  ethical 
conduct121. However, there is no information available on the functioning of this declaration 
system122.  The  GRECO  recommendation  calling  to  concentrate  disciplinary  authority  over 
judges to within the Judicial Service Commission remains to be implemented123.  

A  new  law  has  been  adopted  for  the  protection  of  whistleblowers.  In  March  2022,  the 
Parliament  adopted  a  new  law  on  the  protection  of  whistleblowers124,  which  transposes  the 
EU Whistleblowing Directive into national law125. According to the new law, the Defender of 
Rights126  will  be  assigned  a  central  and  referral  role  on  the  new  provisions,  including  the 
report on the functioning of the whistleblowing system127. This legislative development will 
be used to reassess the previous GRECO recommendation to revise the protective regime for 
whistleblowers128. In 2021, the Defender of Rights treated 81 cases of whistleblowing129. 

The existing anti-corruption measures for public procurement in the time of COVID-19 
pandemic continue to be implemented. The sepecific guidelines issued in June 2020 by the 
Anti-Corruption Agency and the State Procurement Directorate continue to apply130.  

III.  MEDIA PLURALISM AND MEDIA FREEDOM 

The  French  legal  framework  concerning  media  pluralism  is  established  by  the  Constitution 
and  specific  sectorial  legislation,  enforced  by  the  independent  media  regulator.  The 
Constitution  protects  freedom  of  expression  and  guarantees  pluralism  of  the  media.  The 
Declaration of the Rights of People and of the Citizen recognises freedom of expression as a 

119  Under  Article  65  of  the  Constitution,  on  the  double  issue  of  the  responsibility  and  the  protection  of 

magistrates. 

120  Proposals aim to: place ethics at the heart of the magistrate's function; promote the detection of disciplinary 
breaches; improving the conduct of disciplinary proceedings and the scale of sanctions; and strengthen the 
personal  and  functional  protection  of  magistrates.  Plenary  formation  of  the  Superior  Council  of  the 
Judiciary, Opinion to the President of the Republic Referral of 17 February 2021, Submitted to the President 
of the Republic on 24 September 2021.  

121  On average, between one-third and one-fourth of the magistrates move every year. Information received in 

the context of the country visit to France from High Council of Magistrates (CSM). 

122  In  2021  there  was  a  case  of  post-employment  conflict  of  interest  concerning  a  senior  level  magistrate. 
Information received in the context of the country visit to France from High Council of Magistrates (CSM). 

123  GRECO Fourth Evaluation Round - Addendum to the Second Compliance Report, p. 10. 
124  Law No. 2022-401 of March 21, 2022 aimed at improving the protection of whistleblowers. 
125  Directive (EU) 2019/1937 on the protection of persons who report breaches of Union Law. 
126  The Defender of Rights is the entity that provides support and advice to whistleblowers. 2021 Rule of Law 

Reports, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in France, p. 10. 

127  Information received in the context of the country visit to France from the Defender of Rights. 
128  GRECO Fifth Evaluation Round - Compliance Report, p. 17. 
129  There is a surge of cases stemming from large corporations or public institutions. Information received from 

the Defender of Rights in the context of the country visit to France. 

130  For each phase of the public procurement, the guidelines (titled on ‘Managing the risk of corruption in the 
public procurement cycle’) indicate the associated risks of corruption, suggest mitigation measures, and give 
recommendations on how to develop organisational risk mapping and anticorruption codes of conduct. 2021 
Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in France, p. 10. 

16 

 
                                                 
fundamental right. Transparency on media ownership is guaranteed by specific legislation131. 
Legislation to transpose the Audiovisual Media Services Directive has been adopted132.  

The  independent  media  regulator  has  been  redesigned  for  a  better  regulation  of  the 
online  sphere.  As  of  1  January  2022133,  the  media  regulator  Conseil  supérieur  de 
l’audiovisuel (CSA) and the online copyright authority  Haute autorité pour la diffusion des 
oeuvres  et  la  protection  des  droits  sur  internet  (HADOPI)  have  merged  creating  a  new 
regulator  with  a  broader  scope  of  competence:  the  Autorité  de  régulation  de  la 
communication audiovisuelle et numérique  (ARCOM). The aim of the reform is to create a 
unique  national  regulator  with  increased  powers  (including  conciliation  procedures  and 
investigative  powers)  over  the  entire  field  of  audiovisual  and  digital  content.  ARCOM  is 
granted  with  wider  competences  regarding  content  creation  and  obligations,  copyright, 
combating disinformation as well as harmful online content. The ARCOM board is composed 
of nine members, appointed every two years by five different authorities (from the executive, 
legislative  and  judiciary)134  for  a  single,  non-renewable  term  of  six  years.  ARCOM’s 
independence  is  guaranteed  by  the  same  safeguards  as  those  in  place  for  CSA  and 
HADOPI135.  The Media Pluralism  Monitor (MPM  2022) considers the independence of the 
media regulator to be an area of very low risk136. 

There have been no changes  in the legal framework  regulating  transparency of media 
ownership  since  the  last  Rule  of  Law  report137;  the  issues  related  to  horizontal  and 
cross-media  concentration  persists.  France  has  in  place  legal  safeguards  to  ensure 
transparency  of  media  ownership,  which  is  guaranteed  by  the  Law  on  the  Freedom  of 
Communication, the Law to Support Confidence in the Digital Economy, and the Law on the 
Freedom of the Press138. These laws state that any editor of a broadcasting service or director 
of publications must keep certain information, including ownership, permanently available to 
the  public139.  The  MPM  2022  registers  a  medium  risk  for  the  transparency  of  media 
ownership, pointing to the complexity of shareholding structures in the media sector140, and 

131  Law No. 86-1067 of 30 September 1986 on the Freedom of Communication; Law No. 2004-575 of 21 June 
2004 to support confidence in the digital economy, and Law of 29 July 1881 on the Freedom of the Press; 
these  laws  state  that  any  editor  of  a  broadcasting  service  or  director  of  publication  must  keep  certain 
information permanently available to the public, including ownership. 

132  The  Decree  transposing  the  AVMSD,  decree  No.  2021-793  was  adopted  on  22  June  2021.  An  additional 
decree, Decree No. 2021-1923 of 30 December 2021 on the procedure for the provisional suspension of the 
retransmission  of  certain  audiovisual  services,  was  adopted  to  complete  the  transposition  of  the  AVMSD. 
France ranks 26th in the 2022 Reporters without Borders World Press Freedom Index compared to  34th in 
the previous year. 

133  Law no. 2021-1382 of 25 October 2021 relating to regulation and protection of access to cultural works in 

the digital age. 

134  The President is appointed by the President of the Republic. Three members are appointed by the President 
of the National Assembly, three by the President of the Senate, one by the Vice-President of the Council of 
State and one by the First President of the Court of Cassation. 

135  The law on the Freedom of Communication ensures the independence of CSA and its members. The CSA 
was  established  in  1989  as  an  independent  administrative  authority.  General  provisions  are  in  place  to 
minimise interference from the media sector and to prohibit taking instructions from other public authorities. 
See 2020 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in France, p. 8. 

136  2022 Media Pluralism Monitor, France, p. 16 
137  2021 Rule of Law Reports, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in France, p. 11  
138  Law No. 86-1067 of 30 September 1986; Law No. 2004-575 of 21 June 2004; Law of 29 July 1881. 
139  A  draft  law  of  8  February  2022  on  media  independence  envisages  reinforcement  of  media  ownership 

transparency measures in the press sector. 

140  2022 Media Pluralism Monitor, France, pp. 18-19. 

17 

 
                                                 
indicates  a  high  degree  of  concentration  in  the  French  media  landscape141.  During  the 
presidential  elections  campaign,  Reporters  Without  Borders  (RSF) 
issued  several 
recommendations  to  candidates  to  reinforce  media  freedom  and  called  for  the  revision  of 
legislation  on  media  concentration142.  In  November  2021  a  Senate  Commission  of  inquiry 
was established to examine media concentration in France and its impact on democracy. The 
final  report  of  the  Senate  Commission  was  adopted  on  31  March  2022143.  The  Senate 
Commission suggested a complete rewriting of the Law on the Freedom of Communication 
which  it  considered  has  become  “obsolete”,  and  put  forward  32  proposals.  The  proposals 
included the reinforcing of the guarantees of independence and ethics, prevention of conflicts 
of interest in large groups and limiting vertical concentration of media ownership. 

Authorisations  and  licensing  in  the  media  sector  are  regulated  under  the  Law  on 
Freedom  to  Communicate.  Authorisations  for  terrestrial  television  and  radio  broadcasting 
are granted by the media regulator (now ARCOM)  following bid tenders and subject to the 
conclusion  of  an  agreement  with  the  media  regulator,  with  the  exception  of  the  public 
national providers, France Télévisions and Radio France. The term  of authorisations cannot 
exceed  10  years  in  principle  but  is  subject  to  extensions  and  various  derogations. 
Broadcasting  services  that  are  not  subject  to  the  authorisation  –  namely,  those  that  are 
broadcast  or  distributed  through  a  network  that  does  not  use  frequencies  allocated  by  the 
media  regulator  (cable,  satellite,  asymmetric  digital  subscriber  line  (ADSL),  internet, 
telephony, etc.) – must nevertheless conclude a standard agreement or file a prior declaration 
with the regulator. 

Structural  legal  safeguards  ensure  the  independence  of  French  public  service  media. 
The French public service media (France Télévisions) is regulated by the Law on Freedom to 
Communicate  (Law  Léotard)144.  The  French  state  holds  the  entire  capital  of  France 
Télévisions, which is subject to the legislation on public limited companies. According to the 
Law Léotard, public service media must ensure pluralism of information and independence as 
well as diversity of opinion, respect for human rights and democratic principles. Furthermore, 
when broadcasting television  news, the services of  France Télévisions have an independent 
editorial  line145.  The  MPM  2022  considers  the  independence  of  public  service  media 
governance to be an area of low risk146 . The governing bodies of France Télévisions are the 
Board  of  Directors  and  its  committees,  the  President,  and  the  Programme  Advisory  Board. 
The appointment procedures for the management and the boards of the public service media, 
laid  down  by  the  Law  on  Freedom  to  Communicate,  are  transparent  and  balanced.  The 
President  is  appointed  for  five  years  by  ARCOM,  by  a  majority  of  its  members.  This 
appointment is subject to a reasoned decision based on criteria of competence and experience. 
The Board of  Directors  comprises, in  addition  to  the President, 14 members; five members 
are  independent  persons  appointed  by  ARCOM  for  their  competence,  one  of  whom 
represents  the  consumer  protection  associations.  There  are  also  safeguards  in  place  against 
arbitrary  dismissals.  The  President  of  France  Télévisions  presents  an  annual  report  on  the 
fulfilment  of  the  remit’s  terms  and  conditions  to  the  committees  responsible  for  cultural 
affairs  and  finance  of  the  National  Assembly  and  the  Senate.  ARCOM  guarantees  the 

141 2022 Media Pluralism Monitor, France, p. 19 
142  Reporters  without  Borders  (2022),  French  presidential  election  –  RSF’s  ten  proposals  for  journalistic 

freedom and independence.  

143  Final report by Senate Commission of inquiry on media concentration in France (2022). 
144 Law No. 86-1067 of 30 September 1986. 
145 Article 44 of Law No. 86-1067 of 30 September 1986. 
146 2022 Media Pluralism Monitor, France, p. 29. 

18 

 
                                                 
independence  and  impartiality  of  the  public  service  media.  In  its  annual  activity  report, 
ARCOM must present a report on France Télévisions’s compliance with its obligations. 

Attacks on and threats to the physical safety of journalists continue but the Government 
has  taken  steps  to  strengthen  their  protection.  Since  the  2021  Rule  of  Law  Report,  a 
significant  number  of  alerts  have  been  published  for  France  on  the  Council  of  Europe’s 
Platform to promote the protection of journalism and safety of journalists147. They related in 
particular  to  harassment,  intimidation  and  attacks  on  physical  safety  and  integrity  of 
journalists. To address the tensions between the press and the police forces148, following the 
report submitted by the Independent Commission on Press and Law Enforcement Relations, a 
monthly liaison committee between the Ministry of the Interior and the press was established 
in January 2022 to enable permanent dialogue. In parallel, a working group was set up in July 
2021  dedicated  to  the  identification  of  journalists  for  security  purpose,  in  the  context  of 
public  street  events149.  It  involved  representatives  of  journalists  and  their  employers, 
journalism associations and the Commission for the Identity Card of Professional Journalists 
(CCIJP)150. A new version of the National Law Enforcement Scheme (SNMO) was published 
on 16 December 2021, which recognises the special role of journalists during demonstrations. 
It also provides for the obligation to guarantee their security during demonstrations, including 
unauthorised  or  even  prohibited  demonstrations.  Offences  committed  against  journalists 
during demonstrations are subject to judicial proceedings, provided that they are detected or 
brought  to  the  attention  of  the  law  enforcement  authorities151.The  MPM  2022  reports  a 
medium risk with regard to the protection of the right to information, due to criticisms related 
to the extension of the scope of the law on the ‘protection of trade secret’152. 

IV.  OTHER INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES RELATED TO CHECKS AND BALANCES 

France  is  a  democratic  republic  with  a  semi-presidential  system  of  government,  with  a 
President  directly  elected  by  the  people  and  a  Prime  Minister  who  is  accountable  to 
Parliament.  The  bicameral  Parliament  consists  of  the  National  Assembly  and  the  Senate. 
Legislative proposals can originate from the Government or from members of both Houses of 
Parliament.  The  Constitutional  Council  scrutinises  the  constitutionality  of  laws,  before  or 
after their adoption.  Independent  authorities play  an important  role in  the system of  checks 
and balances. 

The practice of nationwide public consultations was further reinforced and extended to 
other  fields,  including  the  justice  system.  As  mentioned  above153,  the  Estates  General  of 
Justice were conceived as a structured and open democratic debate. Both the general public 
and law professionals could express their views on the reforms needed in the justice system. 

147  Council of Europe, Platform to promote the protection of journalism and safety of journalists, France. 
148  See  Alerts  from  the  Council  of  Europe,  Platform  to  promote  the  protection  of  journalism  and  safety  of 

journalists, France, https://fom.coe.int/en/alerte?years=2022&typeData=1&time=1653914309287.  

149  Journalist can, by  way of derogation,  move  freely  within the  security  systems, position themselves behind 
the lines of the law enforcement forces. They must then be able to produce a press card or a certificate from 
their employer and position themselves in such a way that they cannot be confused with the participants in 
the attack and do not obstruct the action of the  law enforcement authorities. See Input from France for the 
2022 Rule of law Report, p.2 

150  Input from France for the 2022 Rule of Law Report, p. 2. 
151  Input from France for the 2022 Rule of Law Report, p. 2. 
152  MPM indicates that there have been several recent cases in which this ‘package’ was used to restrict access 

to information deemed of public interest. See 2022 Media Pluralism Monitor, France, p. 11  

153  See above p. 7. 

19 

 
                                                 
An  online  consultation  took  place  at  national  level154,  and  266  events  such  as  debates  and 
conferences were organised throughout the country. In parallel, until the end of January 2022, 
seven  thematic  working  groups  involving  more  than  60  justice  and  law  professionals 
(including magistrates, lawyers, registry staff and university professors) were  set up155. The 
independent  committee in charge of drafting the  final  report was entrusted with  taking into 
account  all  the  contributions  gathered  as  part  of  this  exercise  to  feed  its  evaluation. 
Furthermore, a new Citizens’ Participation Platform156 allows the public to have access to all 
information  relating  to  non-compulsory  citizen  participation  procedures  carried  out  by  the 
State  and,  where  appropriate,  express  their  interest  in  registering,  as  well  as  to  consult 
citizens’  contributions  and  the  follow-up  given  to  them,  and  thus  to  measure  the  impact  of 
their  participation  on  public  policies.  In  2021,  three  nation-wide  consultations  were  co-
developed  and  co-led  by  the  Ministry  for  Relations  with  Parliament  and  Citizens’ 
Participation and the Interministerial Centre for Citizens’ Participation (CIPC), including on 
the  topic  of  discrimination  and  in  relation  to  the  Conference  on  the  Future  of  Europe.  To 
ensure  the  follow-up  of  proposals  made  in  the  context  of  this  conference,  a  citizens’ 
monitoring  committee,  made  up  of  15  citizens  who  participated  in  the  consultation,  was 
created157.  

Accelerated  procedures  for  the  adoption  of  laws  continued  to  be  used  regularly, 
including  for  laws  with  a  significant  impact  on  individual  freedoms.  Out  of  67  laws 
enacted  between  1  July  2021  and  8  April  2022,  45  had  been  submitted  to  an  accelerated 
procedure by the Government158. As already noted in  the 2021 Rule of  Law Report159, this 
procedure  was  repeatedly  used  for  laws  with  an  important  impact  on  individual  freedoms, 
such as the  Law  on  the  prevention of  terrorism  and intelligence160,  the  Law for  trust in  the 
justice  system161,  the  Law  on  criminal  responsibility  and  internal  security162  and  the  Law 
reinforcing the tools to manage the health crisis163. As regards the latter, the general assembly 
of  the  National  Council  of  Bars  issued  a  resolution  disapproving  the  use  of  the  accelerated 
procedure,  which  prevents  a  genuine  debate  and  parliamentary  scrutiny,  to  adopt  a  law 

154  An  online  platform  (https://www.parlonsjustice.fr/)  was  launched,  with  a  questionnaire  available  in  3 
versions (addressed respectively to the general public, to magistrates and officials of the Ministry of Justice, 
and to partner stakeholders) allowing approximately 40 000 people to express their views until 10 December 
2021. The platform also included a space for collective participation, which allowed to collect 443 written 
contributions from 267 organisations (including magistrates’ associations and courts). The summaries of all 
the written contributions were published on 27 January 2022 on the dedicated online platform. 

155  These  workshops  addressed,  among  others,  the  topics  of  simplification  of  criminal  proceedings, 
simplification  of  civil  justice,  as  well  as  the  evolution  of  tasks  and  statuses.  A  convergence  workshop 
composed of citizens, magistrates, ministry officials and justice stakeholders took place on 31 January 2022 
to prioritise and deepen the analysis of the proposals resulting from the consultation. 

156  The platform, designed and operated by the Interministerial Centre for Citizens’ Participation (CIPC), was 
launched on 29 November 2021 by the Minister for Relations  with Parliament and Citizens’ Participation. 
The CIPC is leading inter-ministerial coordination to feed the platform and ensure that citizens can monitor 
the implementation of the actions resulting from their participation. 

157  This committee is entrusted with promoting the proposals made by French citizens and to monitor how they 
have  been  taken  into  account.  It  will  draft  a  collective  report  which  will  be  made  public  when  the 
Conference’s Executive Committee delivers its conclusions at European level. 

158  Written contribution from the French authorities in the context of the country visit to France, p. 13. 
159  2021 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in France, p. 14. 
160  Law No 2021-998 of 30 July 2021 on the prevention of acts of terrorism and intelligence. 
161  Law No 2021-1729 of 22 December 2021 for trust in the justice system.  
162  Law No 2022-52 of 24 January 2022 on criminal liability and internal security. 
163  Law No 2022-46 of January 22, 2022 reinforcing the tools for managing the health crisis and modifying the 

public health code. 

20 

 
                                                 
impacting  fundamental  freedoms,  in  the  absence  of  an  imminent  danger164.  The  National 
Advisory  Commission  on  Human  Rights  (CNCDH)165  reiterated  its  disapproval  of  the 
frequent use of this procedure outside strict emergency requirement and in areas with a direct 
impact  on  public  freedoms  and  human  rights,  as  it  restricts  significantly  the  parliamentary 
debate essential in a democracy166.  

The emergency regime to address the COVID-19 pandemic has been extended, with the 
Constitutional  Council  defining  the  limits  of  the  executive  and  legislative  powers.  The 
transitional regime for phasing out from the state of health emergency167, introduced by the 
law  of  31  May  2021  until  30  September  2021,  was  initially  extended  until  15  November 
2021168 and then until 31 July 2022169. The Constitutional Council reviewed both laws before 
their  promulgation,  declared  them  partly  unconstitutional  and  made  important  findings 
regarding the extent of the judicial scrutiny of such laws.  In particular, in its decision170 on 
the Law of 5 August 2021, the Constitutional Council rejected the claim that the deadlines set 
for Parliament to examine and amend the text were too short171, but also noted the limits to its 
constitutional  power  to  review  of  the  opportunity  of  adopting  a  law  introducing  such  a 
regime172.  On  the  substance,  the  Constitutional  Council  highlighted  that  the  lawmaker’s 
assessment was corroborated by opinions of a scientific committee required by law, and that 
the  measures  were  surrounded  by  sufficient  safeguards,  with  the  exception  of  some 
provisions  declared  unconstitutional.  As  regards  the  Law  of  10  November  2021,  the 
Constitutional Council173 validated the extension of the emergency regime until 31 July 2022, 
recalling fundamental principles imposed on the lawmaker174 and the executive power175 in 
such  a  context.  On  substance,  the  possibility  for  school  heads  to  access  the  health  data  of 
students  and  several  government  authorisations  to  issue  new  ordinances  were  declared 
unconstitutional.  In  its  2021  Annual  Study176,  dedicated  to  the  states  of  emergency,  the 

164  Resolution of 14 January 2022.  
165  The CNCDH is  a national  human  rights  institution accredited with  an “A Status” by  the GANHRI  Sub-

Committee on Accreditations, in compliance with the Paris Principles. 
166  Contribution from ENNHRI for the 2022 Rule of Law Report, p. 252. 
167  2021 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in France, p. 14. 
168  Law of 5 August 2021 on managing the public health state of emergency. 
169  Law  of  10  November  2021  on  various  health  vigilance  provisions,  published  in  the  Official  Journal  of  11 

November 2021. 

170  Decision no. 2021-824 DC of 5 August 2021. 
171  At para. 10, the Constitutional Council notes that, “despite their particular brevity, the deadlines set in the 
National  Assembly  and  then  in  the  Senate  for  submitting  amendments  to  bills  in  committee  and  in  public 
session did not hinder the effective exercise by Members of Parliament of their right to amend, nor did they 
deprive of effect the requirements of clarity and sincerity of parliamentary debate”. 

172  See para. 22 of the decision: “as the Constitutional Council does not have a general discretion that is similar 
to that of Parliament, it cannot call into question the legislator's evaluation of the existence of a public health 
catastrophe and of the risk that it could continue over the next two months”. 

173  Decision no. 2021-828 DC of 9 November 2021. 
174  At  para.  5  of  its  Decision,  the  Constitutional  Council  held  that  “the  Constitution  does  not  exclude  the 
possibility for the legislator to provide for a state of health emergency regime. It is in its remit, within this 
framework, to ensure the reconciliation between this objective of constitutional value and the respect of the 
rights and freedoms recognized to all those who reside on the territory of the Republic”. 

175  At para. 8, the Constitutional Council states that “for the implementation of the state of health emergency, 
measures  may  be  taken  by  the  regulatory  power  for  the  sole  purpose  of  guaranteeing  public  health.  They 
must be strictly proportionate to the health risks incurred and appropriate to the circumstances of time and 
place.  They  are  terminated  without  delay  when  they  are  no  longer  necessary.  Courts  are  responsible  for 
ensuring that these measures are appropriate, necessary and proportionate to the purpose they pursue”. 

176  Council of State (2021), 2021 Annual Study, Les états d’urgence: la démocratie sous contraintes, approved 

by the general assembly of the Council of State on 8 July 2021, see Annex I.  

21 

 
                                                 
Council  of  State  pointed  out  that  the  prolonged  use  of  such  regimes  destabilises  the 
institutional balance and the democratic institutions, and made 15 proposals to better define 
and organise the states of emergency. 

On 1 January 2022, France had 25 leading judgments of the European Court of Human 
Rights  pending  implementation177.  At  that  time,  France’s  rate  of  leading  judgments  from 
the past 10 years that remained pending was at 28% and the average time that the judgments 
had  been  pending  implementation  was  two  years  and  11  months178.  The  oldest  leading 
judgment, pending implementation for 12 years, concerns the inaction of the authorities in the 
execution of judiciary measures of expulsion regarding illegally occupied lands179. On 1 July 
2022, the number of leading judgments pending implementation has decreased to 24180. 

Independent  authorities  expressed  concerns  regarding  the  impact  of  laws  adopted  to 
manage  crisis  situations  on  individual  freedoms.  In  an  opinion  of  20  July  2021,  the 
Defender  of  Rights181  expressed  concerns  on  the  potential  impact  of  the  laws  on  managing 
the health crisis on individual freedoms, and more particularly on the risks of discrimination 
and violations of children’s rights and data protection rules. With regard to the fight against 
terrorism,  the  Commission  consultative  des  droits  de  l’homme  (CNCDH)  criticised  the 
inclusion in ordinary law of preventive measures182 that were part of the law relating to the 
state of emergency.  Initially introduced into ordinary law on an experimental basis183, these 
measures  were  made  permanent  by  the  Law  on  the  prevention  of  terrorism  and 
intelligence184.  During  a  hearing  with  parliamentarians,  the  CNCDH  reiterated  its  concern 
about  these  measures,  especially  given  that  their  impact  on  human  rights  has  not  yet  been 
assessed independently185. As regards the Law on Global Security186, which created concerns 
as regards the freedoms of expression and information and the right to  freedom of peaceful 
assembly187,  the  independent  authorities  pointed  out  that  there  had  been  no  opportunity  to 
assess its actual impact on civil society, as there were no major demonstrations or other large 
scale events during which the measures foreseen for could be implemented188. 

177  The adoption of necessary execution  measures  for a  judgment by the European  Court of Human  Rights is 
supervised by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe. It is the Committee’s practice to group 
cases against a State requiring similar execution measures, particularly general measures, and examine them 
jointly. The first case in the group is designated as the leading case as regards the supervision of the general 
measures and repetitive cases within the group can be closed when it is assessed that all possible individual 
measures needed to provide redress to the applicant have been taken. 

178  All figures are calculated by the European Implementation Network and are based on the number of cases 
that  are  considered  pending  at  the  annual  cut-off  date  of  1  January  2022.  See  the  contribution  from  the 
European Implementation Network for the 2022 Rule of Law Report, p. 42. 

179  Judgment  of  the  European  Court  of  Human  Rights  of  21  January  2010,  Barret  and  Sirjean  v.  France, 

13829/03, pending implementation since 2010. 

180 Data according to the online database of the Council of Europe (HUDOC). 
181  Defender 
rights, 

opinion 

of 

of 

20 

July 

2021, 

https://juridique.defenseurdesdroits.fr/doc_num.php?explnum_id=20864.  

182  These  measures  relate  to  individual  monitoring,  surveillance  measures,  and  home  searches  ordered  by  the 

administrative authorities. 

183  By Law no. 2017-1510 of 30 October 2017 strengthening internal security and the fight against terrorism. 
184  Law no. 2021-998 of 30 July 2021 on the prevention of acts of terrorism and intelligence. 
185  Contribution from ENNHRI for the 2022 Rule of Law Report, p. 252. 
186  Law No. 2021-646 of 25 May 2021 for global security preserving freedoms. 
187  2021 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in France, p. 16. 
188  Information received from the Defender of Rights and the Commission consultative des droits de l’homme in 

the context of the country visit to France. 

22 

 
                                                 
A  criminal  investigation  was  opened  into  use  of  surveillance  spyware  targeting  in 
particular journalists. It was reported that a number of French and French-based journalists 
and  media  company  owners  have  been  targeted  by  Pegasus  and  equivalent  spyware 
surveillance software189. On 19 and 20 July 2021 respectively, the media company Mediapart 
and  NGO  Reporters  without  Borders  (RSF)  lodged  criminal  complaints  before  the  Paris 
Prosecutors’  Office190,  which  opened  an  investigation  on  charges  of  invasion  of  privacy, 
interception  of  correspondence,  fraudulent  access  to  a  computer  system  and  criminal 
association.  

The  Law  on  republican  principles,  supplementing  the  regulation  on  the  activities  and 
funding  of  associations,  entered  into  force  and  a  number  of  stakeholders  raised 
concerns as regards its potential impact on the civic space. Under the Law on republican 
principles191,  associations  or  foundations  requesting  public  subsidies  must  subscribe  and 
comply  with  a  ‘contract  of  republican  commitment’192,  under  penalty  of  repaying  the 
allocated  subsidies193.  Compliance  with  the  ‘contract’  also  becomes  a  condition  for  an 
association to be recognised as having a public utility. Moreover, the law extends the list of 
grounds  for  dissolution  of  associations  by  decree  of  the  President  of  the  Republic194.  The 
Constitutional  Council  censured  a  provision  allowing  the  provisional  suspension  of  an 
association195. As to the financing of associations, in particular with a religious character, the 
law provides that it will be more closely monitored196. The law on republican principles also 
modified the conditions for creating and operating religious associations, which will have to 
declare  themselves  to  the  prefect  every  five  years,  and  reinforced  their  accounting 
obligations197.  A  number  of  national  and  international  stakeholders,  including  independent 

189  See Le Figaro (2021), ‘Pegasus case: the Paris prosecutor's office opens an investigation into the espionage 

of journalists’.  

190  17 journalists  from 7 countries joined RSF’s complaint on 5 August 2021. See  Reporters  without Borders 
(2021), press release of 5 August 2021, ‘NSO/Pegasus: 17 journalists from 7 countries join the complaints 
filed by RSF at the UN and before the French courts’.  

191  Law no. 2021-1109 of 24 August 2021 reinforcing respect for the principles of the Republic. 
192  Such  contract  refers  to  the  commitment  to  respect  secularism  and  other  fundamental  principles  of  the 

Republic, such as equality between men and women, human dignity and fraternity. 

193  In a reservation of interpretation, the Constitutional  Council ruled that the withdrawal of the subsidy could 
not, without disproportionately affecting the freedom of association, lead to the restitution of sums paid for a 
period prior to the breach of the republican contract. 

194  The  law  replaces  the  terms  ‘armed  street  demonstrations’  with  the  wider  notion  of  ‘violent  acts  against 
persons or property’. Furthermore, the dissolution of associations becomes possible not only if they provoke 
discrimination, hatred or violence, against a certain group of persons, but also if they engage in actions that 
contribute to such acts. Finally, associations may be held liable for acts committed by their members, acting 
in this capacity, or for acts directly related to their activities. 

195  The text voted by Parliament provided that, in the event of an emergency, the Minister of the Interior could 
pronounce the suspension of an association, pending its dissolution, for a maximum period of three months, 
renewable once. The Constitutional Council ruled that these provisions violated the freedom of association, 
as  they  allowed  to  suspend  the  activities  of  an  association  of  which  it  is  not  yet  established  that  they 
seriously disturb public order. See Decision no. 2021-823 DC of 13 August 2021.  

196  Endowment funds, a tool for financing patronage, will be more controlled by prefects. Tax authorities will 
be  able  to  ensure  that  only  associations  that  meet  the  conditions  set  out  by  law  can  benefit  from  public 
generosity and issue tax receipts. 

197  Such associations must declare foreign donations of more than EUR 10 000 and the transfer of the property 
of places of worship to a foreign state, and the prefect may object when a fundamental interest of society is 
at  stake.  As  regards  hybrid  associations,  which  are  governed  general  law  on  associations  and  exercise  a 
religious activity, their obligations, in particular in terms of administrative and accounting, are aligned with 
those  of  religious  associations  (certification  of  their  accounts  in  certain  cases,  separate  accounting  for 

23 

 
                                                 
 
authorities,  expressed  criticism  regarding  the  potential  impact  of  the  new  provisions  on  the 
freedom of association and freedom of expression both before the adoption of the law198 and 
after its entry into force199. More particularly, the CNCDH expressed preoccupations that the 
obligation  to  subscribe  to  a  ‘contract  of  republican  commitment’  risks  creating  a  general 
climate  of  mistrust  towards  associations200.  Overall,  the  civic  space  in  France  has  been 
assessed as narrowed201. 

New  laws  have  been  adopted  to  improve  the  financial  environment  for  civil  society 
organisations. The law favouring associative commitment202 mitigates the financial liability 
of volunteer associative leaders in the event of mismanagement, by extending the ‘negligence 
exception’ provided for business managers203. Before that, personal assets of such volunteer 
leaders could  be seized in  the event  of mismanagement. Furthermore, a law to  improve the 
cash flow of associations204 now allows for the keeping of the unspent surplus of a subsidy of 
more than EUR 23 000 under certain conditions. The new law also provides that the public 
authority  is  required  to  pay  the  subsidy  within  60  days  of  the  date  of  notification  of  the 
decision to award it, unless the administrative authority has set other payment dates or made 
the  payment  conditional  on  the  occurrence  of  a  specific  event.  In  addition,  the  law  allows 
associations of general interest or recognised as being of public utility to grant zero interest 
loans to other associations that are members of the same union or federation of associations. 
Finally, the law introduced  the possibility for the  Caisse des dépôts  to  pay  a portion  of the 
sums  from  accounts  of  associations  that  are  no  longer  active  for  the  benefit  of  the 
development of associative life205. 

religious activities, declaration of funds coming from abroad). The prefect may order an association whose 
purpose is in fact the exercise of a religion to declare itself as a religious association. 
198  2021 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in France, p. 17. 
199  Contribution  from  the  Civil  Liberties  Union  for  Europe  for  the  2022  Rule  of  Law  Report,  p.  178,  and 
contribution from the Ligue des droits de l’homme on behalf of the European Civic Forum for the 2022 Rule 
of Law Report, p. 8.  

200  Contribution from ENNHRI for the 2022 Rule of Law Report, p. 248. 
201  2021  Rule  of  Law  Report,  Country  Chapter  on  the  rule  of  law  situation  in  France,  p.  16.  See  also  rating 
given by CIVICUS.  Ratings are on a five-category scale defined as: open, narrowed,  obstructed, repressed 
and closed. 

202  Law no. 2021-874 of 1 July 2021 favouring associative commitment. 
203  This  exception,  enshrined  in  the  Commercial  Code,  provides  that  in  the  event  of  simple  negligence  in  the 
management of the company committed by the de jure or de facto manager, his liability for the insufficiency 
of assets cannot be engaged. 

204  Law 2021-875 of 1 July 2021 to improve the cash flow of associations. 
205  The  Caisse  des  dépôts  and  its  subsidiaries  form  a  public  group  serving  the  general  interest  and  economic 
development  of  France.  It  is  responsible  for  the  protection  of  popular  savings,  the  financing  of  social 
housing, and the management of pension institutions. 

24 

 
                                                                                                                                                        
Annex I: List of sources in alphabetical order* 

* The list of contributions received in the context of the consultation for the 2022 Rule of Law report 
can  be  found  at  https://ec.europa.eu/info/publications/2022-rule-law-report-targeted-stakeholder-
consultation_en. 

Central  Office  for  Combating  Corruption  and  Tax  Offences  (OCLCIFF)  (2022),  Contribution  from 
the Central Office for Combating Corruption and Tax Offences for the 2022 Rule of Law Report. 

Centre  for  Media  Pluralism  and  Media  Freedom  (2022),  Media  pluralism  monitor  2022  –  country 
report on France. 

Civicus, Monitor tracking civic space – France https://monitor.civicus.org/country/france/.  

Civil Liberties Union for Europe (2022), Contribution from the Civil Liberties Union for Europe for 
the 2022 Rule of Law Report. 

Constitutional Council, Decision No. 2021-828 DC, 9 November 2021. 

Constitutional Council, Decision No. 2021-927 QPC, 14 September 2021. 

Cooperation  protocol  signed  between  the  Inter-ministerial  Commission  for  the  Coordination  of 
Controls  (CICC)  and  the  French  Anti-Corruption  Agency,  relating  to  the  implementation  of  the 
Recovery  and  Resilience  Facility  signed,  the  European  component  of  the  plan  stimulus,  February 
2022  https://www.agence-francaise-anticorruption.gouv.fr/fr/securisation-des-modalites-daudit-dans-
cadre-facilite-pour-reprise-et-resilience 

Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europe (CCBE),  Statement on the use of Pegasus software, 1 
2022 
February 
https://www.ccbe.eu/fileadmin/speciality_distribution/public/documents/SURVEILLANCE/SVL_Stat
ements/EN_SVL_20220201_CCBE-Statement-on-the-Pegasus-Scandal.pdf  

Council of Europe, Platform to promote the protection of journalism and safety of journalists, France 
https://fom.coe.int/en/pays/detail/11709510.  

Council  of  Europe:  Committee  of  Ministers  (2010),  Recommendation  CM/Rec(2010)12  of  the 
Committee of Ministers to member states on judges: independence, efficiency and responsibilities. 

Council of State (2021), 2021 Annual Study: Les états d’urgence: la démocratie sous contraintes, 8 
July  2021  https://www.conseil-etat.fr/Media/actualites/documents/2021/09-septembre/ea21_etat-d-
urgence.pdf  

Council of the European Union, Annex to the Council Implementing Decision on the approval of the 
assessment of the recovery and resilience plan for France. 

Court  of  Audit  (2021),  Communication  to  the  Finance  Committee  of  the  Senate,  ‘Improving  the 
functioning  of  justice  –  stage  point  of  the  digital  transformation  plan  of  the  Ministry  of  Justice’ 
http://www.senat.fr/fileadmin/Fichiers/Images/commission/finances/Controle/58-
2/Plan_de_transformation_numerique_de_la_justice.pdf 

Defender 
https://juridique.defenseurdesdroits.fr/doc_num.php?explnum_id=20864.  

Opinion 

(2021), 

Rights 

of 

of 

20 

July 

2021 

Defender  of  Rights  (2022),  Contribution  from  the  Defender  of  Rights  for  the  2022  Rule  of  Law 
Report. 

Directorate-General  for  Communication  (2019),  Flash  Eurobarometer  482:  businesses’  attitudes 
towards corruption in the EU. 

Directorate-General for Communication (2020), Special Eurobarometer 502: corruption. 

Directorate-General  for  Communication  (2022),  Flash  Eurobarometer  507:  businesses’  attitudes 
towards corruption in the EU. 

Directorate-General for Communication (2022), Special Eurobarometer 523: corruption. 

25 

 
Ethics Commissioner of the National Assembly (2022),  Contribution from the Ethics Commissioner 
of the National Assembly for the 2022 Rule of Law Report. 

European  Civic  Forum  (2022),  Contribution  from  the  European  Civic  Forum  for  the  2022  Rule  of 
Law Report. 

European Commission (2020), 2020 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation 
in France.  

European Commission (2021), 2021 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation 
in France. 

European Commission (2022), 2022 EU Justice Scoreboard. 

European  Court  of  Human  Rights,  judgment  of  21  January  2010,  Barret  and  Sirjean  v.  France, 
13829/03. 

European Implementation Network (2022), Contribution from the European Implementation Network 
for the 2022 Rule of Law Report. 

European  Network  of  National  Human  Rights  Institutions  (2022),  Contribution  from  the  European 
Network of National Human Rights Institutions for the 2022 Rule of Law Report. 

First  President  of 
https://www.courdecassation.fr/toutes-les-actualites/2022/03/04/communique-de-madame-chantal-
arens-premiere-presidente-de-la-cour 

(2022),  Press  release  of  4  March  2022 

the  Court  of  Cassation 

French Anti-Corruption Agency (AFA) (2021), Prevention of conflicts of interest in the company (Les 
contrôles 
https://www.agence-francaise-
en 
anticorruption.gouv.fr/files/2021-
11/projet%20guide%20contr%C3%B4les%20comptables%20anticorruption%20en%20entreprise.pdf.  

anticorruption 

comptables 

entreprise) 

French  Anti-Corruption  Agency  (AFA)  (2022)  ‘In  Search  of  Integrity’,  the  serious  corruption 
prevention  awareness  game  https://www.agence-francaise-anticorruption.gouv.fr/fr/decouvrez-en-
quete-dintegrite-jeu-serieux-sensibilisation-prevention-corruption 

French  Anti-Corruption  Agency  (AFA)  (2022),  Control  the  risk  of  impact  of  probity  within 
associations and recognised foundations of public utility (Maîtriser le risque d’atteinte à la probité au 
sein  des  associations  et  fondations  reconnues  d’utilité  publique)  https://www.agence-francaise-
anticorruption.gouv.fr/files/files/GuideArupFrup_Web.pdf.  

French  Anti-Corruption  Agency  (AFA)  (2022),  Implementation  of  a  corruption  risk  prevention 
system  in  the  building  and  public  works  sector  (La mise  en place  d’un  dispositif  de  prévention  des 
risques  de  corruption  dans  le  secteur  du  bâtiment  et  des  travaux  publics)  https://www.agence-
francaise-anticorruption.gouv.fr/files/files/Guide_BTP_AFA_Web.pdf.  

French  Anti-Corruption  Agency  (AFA),  Contribution  from  the  French  Anti-Corruption  Agency  for 
the 2022 Rule of Law Report. 

French  Government  (2021),  Press release  of  15  September  2021, ‘Submission  of  the  administrative 
investigation 
Levrault’ 
concerning 
https://www.gouvernement.fr/communique/12445-remise-du-rapport-d-enquete-administrative-
concernant-edouard-levrault  

Édouard 

report 

French  Government  (2021),  Press  release  of  17  April  2021,  ‘Referral  to  the  High  Council  for  the 
https://www.gouvernement.fr/communique/12235-saisine-du-conseil-superieur-de-la-
Judiciary 
magistrature  

French Government (2022), Input from France for the 2022 Rule of Law Report. 

French  Ministry  of  Justice  (2022),  Contribution  from  the  Ministry  of  Justice  in  the  context  of  the 
country visit. 

26 

 
General  Assembly  of  the  National  Council  of  Bars  (2021),  Resolution  of  17  September  2021 
https://www.cnb.avocat.fr/sites/default/files/documents/cnb-mo_2021-09-17_secret-
professionnel_boissavyadopte.pdf  

GRECO  (2022),  Fifth  Evaluation  Round  –  Compliance  Report on  France  on  preventing  corruption 
and  promoting  integrity  in  central  governments  (top  executive  functions)  and  law  enforcement 
agencies. 

GRECO (2022), Fourth Evaluation Round – Addendum to the Second Compliance Report on France 
on preventing corruption in respect of members of parliament, judges and prosecutors. 

High Authority for the Transparency of Public Life (HATVP) (2022), Written contribution from the 
High Authority for the Transparency of Public Life (HATVP) in the context of the country visit. 

High  Council for  the Judiciary  (2021),  Opinion  on  the  accountability  and  protection  of  magistrates 
http://www.conseil-superieur-magistrature.fr/sites/default/files/atoms/files/avis_pr_vd_internet_0.pdf  

High  Council  for  the  Judiciary  (2021),  Opinion  to  the  President  of  the  Republic  Referral  of  17 
February 
http://www.conseil-superieur-
magistrature.fr/sites/default/files/atoms/files/avis_pr_vd_internet_0.pdf 

2021 

High Council for the Judiciary (2021), Written contribution of the for the Estates General of Justice 
http://prod.conseil-superieur-magistrature.fr/sites/default/files/atoms/files/csm_egj_2022.pdf  

High Council of Magistrates (CSM) (2022),  Contribution from the High Council of Magistrates for 
the 2022 Rule of Law Report. 

L’Opinion (2022), Dupond-Moretti to the Court of Justice of the Republic: "Everything shows your 
determination to smear me" (Dupond-Moretti à la Cour de justice de la République: «Tout démontre 
votre  détermination  à  me  salir»)  https://www.lopinion.fr/politique/dupond-moretti-a-la-cour-de-
justice-de-la-republique-tout-demontre-votre-determination-a-me-salir.  

Le  Figaro  (2021),  ‘Pegasus  case:  the  Paris  prosecutor's  office  opens  an  investigation  into  the 
espionage of journalists’ (‘Affaire Pegasus : le parquet de Paris ouvre une enquête sur l'espionnage 
de 
https://www.lefigaro.fr/flash-eco/affaire-pegasus-enquete-ouverte-a-paris-sur-l-
espionnage-de-journalistes-parquet-20210720 

journalistes’) 

Le Monde (2021), ’Call from 3000 magistrates and a hundred clerks’ (‘L’appel de 3 000 magistrats et 
d’une  centaine  de  greffiers’)  https://www.lemonde.fr/idees/article/2021/11/23/l-appel-de-3-000-
magistrats-et-d-une-centaine-de-greffiers-nous-ne-voulons-plus-d-une-justice-qui-n-ecoute-pas-et-
qui-chronometre-tout_6103309_3232.html  

Ligue  des  droits  de  l’homme  (2022),  Contribution  on  behalf  of  the  European  Civic  Forum  for  the 
2022  Rule  of  Law  Report  https://civicspacewatch.eu/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/France-Lay-out-
done-highlights.pdf  

National  Assembly  (2021),  Law  Commission, Information  Report  No. 4325  https://www.assemblee-
nationale.fr/dyn/15/rapports/cion_lois/l15b4325_rapport-information.pdf 

National  Assembly 
(2022),  Code  of  Conduct  of  Deputies  https://www2.assemblee-
nationale.fr/content/download/461868/4506828/version/1/file/code+de+d%C3%A9ontologie_actualis
%C3%A9+suite+bureau+21022022.pdf 

National  Commission  on  Campaign  Accounts  and  Political  Financing  (CNCCFP)  (2022), 
Contribution  from  the  National  Commission  on  Campaign  Accounts  and  Political  Financing 
(CNCCFP) for the 2022 Rule of Law Report. 

National  Conference  of  Presidents  of  Judicial  Courts  (2022),  Press  release  of  16  February  2022 
https://www.cnptj.fr/abo/cnptj/media_pdf/communique_cnptj_referentiel_national_16_fevrier_2022.p
df  

National  Conference  of  Prosecutors  (2021),  Ten  proposals  for  the  future  of  criminal  justice 
https://twitter.com/conf_nat_procs/status/1479062944940011520  

27 

 
National  Consultative  Commission  on  Human  Rights  (2022),  Contribution  from  the  National 
Consultative Commission on Human Rights for the 2022 Rule of Law Report. 

Council 

National 
https://www.cnb.avocat.fr/sites/default/files/documents/04.cnb-re_2022-01-14_ldh-txt_pjl-outils-
gestion-crise-sanitaire-modifiant-code-sante-publique_fau-roquesfinal-p.pdf 

Resolution 

January 

(2022), 

Bars 

14 

of 

of 

2022 

National  Financial  Prosecutor 
paris.justice.fr/sites/default/files/2022-01/PNF-brochure_A5-2021%5B2%5D.pdf 

(2021),  Annual  Report 

2021 

https://www.tribunal-de-

National  Financial  Prosecutor  (2022),  Contribution  from  the  National  Financial  Prosecutor  for  the 
2022 Rule of Law Report. 

OECD  (2021),  Implementing  the  OECD  Anti-Bribery  Convention,  Phase  4  Report,  France 
https://www.oecd.org/daf/anti-bribery/France-Phase-4-Report-EN.pdf 

Presidency 
https://www.elysee.fr/emmanuel-macron/2021/10/18/etats-generaux-justice  

Republic 

(2021), 

release 

Press 

the 

of 

of 

18  October 

2021 

Reporters without Borders – France https://rsf.org/en/country/france.  

Reporters without Borders (2022), French presidential election – RSF’s ten proposals for journalistic 
freedom 
https://rsf.org/en/french-presidential-election-rsfs-ten-proposals-
journalistic-freedom-and-independence.  

independence 

and 

Reporters without Borders (2022), Press release of 5 August 2021, ‘NSO/Pegasus: 17 journalists from 
7  countries  join  the  complaints  filed  by  RSF  at  the  UN  and  before  the  French  courts’ 
https://rsf.org/fr/nsopegasus-17-journalistes-de-7-pays-se-joignent-aux-plaintes-deposees-par-rsf-
lonu-et-devant-la 

Senate, Order No. 58-1100 http://www.senat.fr/role/comite_deontologie.html 

Senate:  Senate  Commission  of  inquiry  on  media  concentration  in  France  (2022),  Final  report 
http://www.senat.fr/fileadmin/Fichiers/Images/commission/affaires_culturelles/CEmedias/ESSENTIE
L_cemedias.pdf. 

Transparency International (2022), Corruption Perceptions Index 2021. 

World  Bank  (2022),  Press  release,  World  Bank  Group  Debars  ADP  International  S.A. 
https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2022/01/04/world-bank-group-debars-adp-
international-s-a.  

World  Bank  (2022),  Press  release,  World  Bank  Group  sanctions  Bouygues  Bâtiment  International 
https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2022/01/04/world-bank-group-sanctions-bouygues-
b-timent-international.  

28 

 
 
Annex II: Country visit to France 

The Commission services held virtual meetings in March 2022 with: 

Journalistic Ethics and Mediation Council 

  Agence France Presse 
  Anti-Corruption Agency 
  Central Office for Combating Corruption and Tax Offenses 
  Council of State 
  Defender of rights 
  Delegation of the Bars of France 
  Ethics Commissioner of the National Assembly 
  France Télévisions 
  High Authority for the Transparency of Public Life 
  High Council for the Judiciary 
 
  Ministry of Culture 
  Ministry of Justice 
  National Commission on Campaign Accounts and Political Financing 
  National Consultative Commission on Human Rights 
  National Council of Bar Associations 
  National Financial Prosecutor 
  National Journalists Union 
  Radio France 
  Regulatory Authority for Audiovisual and Digital Communication (ARCOM) 
  Reporters without Borders 
  Syndicat de la Magistrature 
  Union Syndicale des Magistrats 

* The Commission also met the following organisations in a number of horizontal meetings:  

  Amnesty International  
  Article 19  
  Civil Liberties Union for Europe 
  Civil Society Europe  
  European Centre for Press and Media Freedom  
  European Civic Forum 
  European Federation of Journalists  
  European Partnership for Democracy 
  European Youth Forum 
  Free Press Unlimited 
  Human Rights Watch  
 
 
 
  Open Society European Policy Institute ( OSEPI) 
  Osservatorio Balcani e Caucaso Transeuropa  
  Philea 
  Reporters Without Borders 
  Transparency International Europe 

ILGA Europe 
International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) 
International Press Institute 

29